Katty Kay Spreads Unsubstantiated Rumors Of Racism (Later Substantiated)

Look that the garbage Katty Kay is reduced to (re)tweeting, because she apparently has nothing of substance to say about the Republican National Convention last night:

 

“Allegedly”. It’s from the far-Left (naturally, as Katty retweets little else) Talking Points Memo. It’s just a claim, no video, no proof. But the BBC’s Washington correspondent, anchor of BBC World News America, and well-paid representative of the BBC on shows like “Morning Joe” on MSNBC and as regular guest host for NPR’s Diane Rehm show, has no problem spreading this as yet unsubstantiated rumor. Because it suits her agenda and biased worldview.

UPDATE: It’s substantiated now. RNC staff admit what happened, and the BBC has rushed to report it. The offenders were tossed immediately. Of course, in the interests of “balance”, the BBC finally mentioned the existence of Mia Love. Having now done the bare minimum, they still refused to tell you about the great reception she received, or that today she’s the top search query on Google. BBC very much not with the news trends on this one. I wonder why? Artur Davis’s appearance is still being censored from BBC output.

What’s most disgusting about what Katty’s done here is that it distracts from something the BBC seems to have overlooked in their coverage of the RNC: Mayor of Saratoga Springs and candidate for the House from Utah, Mia Love, gave a speech which received a rousing reception.

 

 

Anybody think the crowd was filled with racists? Not only that, but Artur Davis, The Obamessiah’s 2008 campaign co-chair, also spoke last night. No reports of monkey chants or anything. Yet Katty Kay wants to help spread rumors to make you think Republicans are racist. Even if it’s just one lone idiot doing it, Katty wants to discredit the entire Party.

This is not professional behavior, but sadly is what we’ve come to expect from her. Keep in mind that, unlike the other Beeboid twitterers we like to bust for bias here, Katty’s page is an official, BBC-sanctioned account, with logo and everything. There is no “views my own” get-out-of-bias-free disclaimer here. This is not the out-of-school, anything goes, stuff which BBC management has decided is outside their jurisdiction. This is a BBC-sanctioned Twitter account, and Katty is officially representing the the BBC here.

UPDATE: Funny how Katty isn’t tweeting about how some lovely Democrats defaced Mia Love’s Wikipedia page by calling her a dirty, worthless whore’ and ‘House Nigger’. (screenshot of the offending text at the link). Wikipedia has since sent it down the memory hole, but you can still see the evidence that there was an offensive edit they had to fix. But Katty’s interested only in spreading rumors harmful to Republicans, not real evidence of acts that make Democrats look bad.

Come to think of it, where are the mentions of Mia Love or Artur Davis in the BBC reports about last night’s convention launch? Nothing from Mardell, nothing in the pictures the BBC posted, nothing from Mark Mardell, nothing in the video clips. It’s like it didn’t happen. Which, of course, is the impression the BBC wants you to have.

Apparently, their fellow travelers at MSNBC cut back to the studio for commentary when Love and Davis took to the podium, so their audiences weren’t allowed to see them. Does anyone know if the BBC did the same thing during their broadcast? Do BBC audiences have any idea that they even exist?

Considering just how much effort has been spent – by Democrats and their supporters in the media, especially including the BBC – over the last five years (I’m including the 2008 election campaign here) trying to tell you that any opposition to The Obamessiah is based on racism, one might think it’s a big deal that Love and Davis both spoke at the national convention. At least the BBC could have mentioned them just to sneer at such blatant tokenism, right?

Please, defenders of the indefensible, at least show me evidence that the BBC didn’t censor these people’s presence entirely. The BBC wouldn’t be so dishonest, would they?

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone
Bookmark the permalink.

60 Responses to Katty Kay Spreads Unsubstantiated Rumors Of Racism (Later Substantiated)

  1. Louis Robinson says:

    ALL minority speakers (and business women) were edited from the MSNBC coverage – except South Carolina governor Nikki Haley (http://www.nikkihaley.com/) whose parents are from India. I guess the lefty bigots at MSNBC thought she just had a deep tan.

    Any minority candidate who allies with the Republicans faces a barrage of hate. The latest victim sadly is the fabulous Mia Love. Her Wikipedia page was hacked into and abuse left on it.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/rnc-star-mia-loves-wikipedia-reportedly-changed-to-dirty-worthless-whre%E2%80%99-who-is-a-house-nier/

    With the help of the archives on this site I intend to collate the BBC’s coverage of this election (Mardell, Kay etc) and send a report to my old masters at the BBC – and to producers. Maybe the weight of evidence can shame them into some action from within. Their complicity in the distortions about the Presidential race are blatant. Cynics may think this is a fruitless exercise – but I am not so sure. Times are changing. Lets not give up hope.

    KNOW THIS – WE WILL HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE.

       27 likes

    • TomR says:

      Clarence Thomas and Herman Cain – two men who suffered a “high-tech lynching for uppity blacks” to quote Thomas. Democrats used dirty, dirty tricks to get rid of them: accuse them of sexual harassment, using racist stereotypes to get their way while claiming they’re the ones who are anti-racist.

         4 likes

  2. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Louis, looks like I added the news about Mia Love’s Wikipedia page just as you were writing this. Great minds, etc.

       8 likes

    • Louis Robinson says:

      David, I don’t know about you, but my British friends living here in Atlanta, (Brit population here is several hundred thousand) are getting the message. They think the BBC is truly neutral, but they’re watching, listening and trying to make sense of the disconnect between their own experience and the propaganda. They admit the American MSM media is bankrupt, now they’re seriously questioning the BBC. This is good. They all have friends n the UK. One Brit at a time.
      (PS I watched BlazeTV online for uninterrupted coverage of the convention – and also other networks for contrast. To see what the MSM chose not to show was breathtaking.)

         19 likes

      • Wild says:

        The BBC may be a division of the Democrat spin machine but they can use the excuse that they have no influence on the election result in the USA.

        So what excuse do the BBC have for being the broadcasting arm of the Left in the UK? Because they can?

           20 likes

        • hippiepooter says:

          The BBC discredits the Right in America it discredits the Right everywhere.

          There’s a huge amount at stake for Planet Gramsci.

             12 likes

          • Earls Court says:

            Antonio Gramsci a hunchback dwarf that spent most his adult life in prison. He died 75 years ago and will end up destroying civilisation very soon.

               6 likes

      • Guest Who says:

        ‘the MSM chose not to show ‘
        Is that replacing ‘The One show’?
        Or most other BBC ‘news’ show efforts, from Today to Newsnight.
        The BBC seems defined more by the ‘unique’ way its editorial sanitises or prioritises, which for a supposedly impartial, professional, trusted broadcaster appears less than optimal.

           4 likes

  3. JAH says:

    There was a very positive piece on the Republican Convention woman’s Hour today which had a speaker explaining how the the Republicans could win and indeed how they could keep a grip on the White House. Very pro-republican but then that will be ignored here as like most BBC output…it was wasn’t biased.

       1 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Not biased? Really? Where did you hear anything about how the Republicans could “keep a grip on the White House”? I heard zero mention of that.

      The segment was introducing (starting @ around 35:30) by suggesting that Ann Romney spoke because the Republican Party is not doing well with women. Cue obligatory Akin rape reference to reinforce the Democrat and Leftoid Narrative that he represents the entire Party. So even though both Bushes, Clinton, and The Obamessiah Himself trotted out their wives at their respective conventions, only Romney is doing it to pander to women, right?. The selected excerpt where Mrs. Romney mentioned the word “women” was meant to support that notion.

      Dr. James Boyce(?) dismissed Mrs. Romney’s battle with cancer and MS as just something that will play well to the hardcore choir, but might not impress the rest of the country. Wake me up when somebody on the BBC says that unchallenged about somebody from the Left. Then he dismissed her entirely with a class war argument: Ann Romney is too wealthy to relate to “normal” women.

      One bit of honesty – which highlights the fact that this is censored elsewhere on the BBC – was where he mentioned that the Republican stance on abortion does not ban it in cases of rape or incest. Thank heavens for small wonders.

      But then he said that her speech was very little to do with specifically women’s issues, which pretty much kills the pandering charge. Oops, moving quickly on, then….

      The claim that people didn’t vote for Kerry because they didn’t like his wife is an absolute joke. Kerry lost for a variety of reasons, but nothing to do with his wife. At least he didn’t just say Bush stole that election.

      The segment wasn’t super biased, but the premise was biased, the introduction was biased, and some of the guest expert’s comments were biased.

         17 likes

  4. Framer says:

    ‘Nuts thrown at black journalist’ is the headline on the BBC World News website.
    It is the tenth most important thing to have happened today, globally, as far as the BBC is concerned, more important even than ‘Soldiers ‘plotted to kill Obama” which is 11th.

       11 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      And it’s just hearsay so far. Even so, the very TPM brief Katty retweeted said that the offender was immediately removed from the premises. So again, not at all representative of the crowd or party. Yet the BBC wants to push the Narrative of racist Republicans. All while they continue to censor news of Mia Love and Artur Davis.

      Pathetic.

         14 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Ah, I see there is now admission that two idiots did do this, and were summarily ejected from the place.

      And at the very bottom of the news brief is when the @#$#ing Beeboids FINALLY mentioned the existence of Mia Love. No mention, though of the rousing reception she got or that she is the No. 1 search on Google right now.

      Which should really be the main story, and which should be the addendum? Scott? Dez? Nicked? Anyone?

      BBC you are utter scum for doing this.

         15 likes

  5. TPO says:

    Being a Brit in Canada I can access most of the televised MSM from south of the border. I spent a fair bit of time watching Fox and was surprised by the number of Democrat inclined commentators that were on to express their views.
    About 10.00 pm MTZ and for a laugh, I flicked over to MSNBC. I wasn’t disappointed and was soon holding my sides as an assortment of knuckle dragging apes, orchestrated by a very butch woman, hurled venom and hysterical abuse at every speaker at the Republican convention. The funniest ape was Shapton. Not one mention at all about policies or the dire economic situation, just ad hominen abuse.
    I don’t pretend to know the nuances of the American pesidential race, but from watching the MSNBC contribution I have a feeling that the charlatans currently infesting the White House are running very scared indeed.
    And to think that the BBC have a regular slot on such a hate fest channel.

       15 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Oh, dear, can’t be calling a black man an “ape”. Dez or Nicked emus will be along to call you a racist any minute now.

         8 likes

    • hippiepooter says:

      The left wing hate machine that is the MSM will be the telling difference to get Obama reelected.

         4 likes

  6. DB says:

    Daniel Nasaw tweeted a link to the TPM story 12 hours before Katty Kay mentioned it. During that time an editorial discussion clearly took place, the conclusion of which was: “Fuck yeah, let’s make this a big fucking deal so it hurts the fucking Republicans. Now, huddle…Goooooo – Obama!”

       8 likes

    • DB says:

      They’ve updated the story about the pricks throwing nuts to include a first BBC online mention of Mia Love. Good work.

         7 likes

      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        I saw that, and have updated my post to reflect it. The barest of minimum honesty from the BBC at last.

           10 likes

        • DB says:

          It’s the Artur Davis thing that’s beyond comprehension to me. How can the BBC ignore that story? A politician intimately associated with Obama’s election campaign in 2008 is now supporting his opponent – and he’s black. And yet you’ll find nothing about Artur Davis on the BBC since May 2010 when he was a Democrat known as the “Alabama Obama”.

             11 likes

          • David Preiser (USA) says:

            I think it’s just racist BBC editors air-brushing out the black folks.

               9 likes

  7. hippiepooter says:

    Thanks for sharing that Mia Love speech DP. What a phenomenon. She has a huge amount to offer.

       5 likes

  8. Demon says:

    Does anyone wonder if these troublemakers were actually Obamalovers who pretended to be Republicans just so they could pull off a stunt like this? The whole thing seems too staged, and too convenient for the Democrats for it to be genuine. By the time the truth is discovered the damage has already been done.

       9 likes

    • Roland Deschain says:

      My thoughts exactly.

         6 likes

    • Mat says:

      Have to say with the level of campaigning being carried out by pro obie-one shadow groups it must be a concern it seemed all too public all very well timed ! and given the lefts habit of childish spectacle you know like dressing up as big corporate America and throwing effigy’s of dead children on to a fat cat to represent debt , a real possibility !

         5 likes

    • Span Ows says:

      Yep, my thoughts too…then I thought perhaps nuts were thrown because of something the camerawoman said/did i.e. they would have thrown nuts and said the same thing at a white guy. In reality (and erroneously) the story isn’t what they did but who they did it too (and we don’t know why)

         5 likes

      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        Look, I have no problem accepting that there were two idiots at the convention. Maybe they were referring to the biased shills at CNN in general as animals? Okay, maybe not. Still, this one incident is no more reason to discredit the entire party (which is Katty Kay’s and the BBC News Online staff’s belief and intent) than it would be to discredit the entire Occupy movement over one incident.

        Of course, with the Occupiers, there have been an almost innumerable amount of incidences of violence, vandalism, rape, possible murder, and anti-Semitism. Yet the BBC has never reported any of it, and would never, ever dream of trying to discredit the movement over them.

        The BBC staff who work the US beat are very sick individuals.

           5 likes

        • Guest Who says:

          ‘this one incident is no more reason to discredit the entire party ‘
          Dunno.
          It seems SOP chez Aunty (and FOAs elsewhere, he said, looking over shoulder).
          Possibly on the basis of career advancement in what is, lest we forget, ‘the world’s most trusted, genetically impartial media organisation’ (c) Boaden. H, et Al.

             2 likes

        • Roland Deschain says:

          It may be no reason to discredit the entire party but if you know the likes of the BBC will attempt to do so anyway, it becomes a very easy way of drowning out your opponent’s message.

          Reason doesn’t come into it. Not that I’m saying that was what happened. Just that it would do no harm to do some digging into the history of those who did the throwing, knowing the modus operandi of the left.

             3 likes

          • Demon says:

            That was my thinking. It is possible that there were a couple of racist rednecks attending the convention. But knowing how dirty the left play and the fact there are no depths to which they wouldn’t stoop, I would be interested to hear more about these individuals.

            It wouldn’t do any harm to spread the story that “They ARE Obama supporters out to cause mischief”. Even if it turns out eventually to be not true, that is how the left operate.

               2 likes

          • Demon says:

            A later thought is the fact that there are two of them somehow makes spontaneity less likely. I would suggest that an attempt to deliberately disrupt in the way I conjecture might require two to back up one another.

               1 likes

  9. Framer says:

    Mark Mardell’s piece on Paul Ryan on BBC Radio 4′s ‘Today’ this morning (Wed) was beyond bitterness. He did not even pretend to mask his bias.

       6 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      The disdain was evident. Link to the segment is here. However, Mardell can get away with it because he provided “balance” by pointing out that Republicans like Ryan, and he might help Romney’s chances.

      But I thought the real bias was in that Mardell had an ordinary civilian woman and a …*shudder*… Evangelical mouthpiece speak on the pro-Ryan side, while he had a professional voice – a “journalist” from Salon – spend a minute essentially calling Ryan a hypocrite (plus a nice class war dig, always a bonus for the BBC).

      The word “Evangelical” is a dog whistle for the Left, and Mardell knows it. Why get someone concerned with social issues to speak about budgetary concerns? His opinion holds little value, but hey: he’s an “Evangelical”, so is a valid representative for all Republicans on all topics, right, BBC?

         5 likes

  10. Beeboidal says:

    BBC North America correspondent Johnny Diamond damns Paul Ryan with faint praise during a 5 LIve news bulletin.

    He was looking straight at the camera and he was looking, of course, straight into people’s living rooms by doing that. Makes him look very open, very sincere.

    I think perhaps those Americans who tuned in thinking, you know, who is this crazed right wing freak, might have walked away thinking, well, that’s not so bad.

    I invite this blog’s resident DOTIs to show me where someone has been described as a crazed left-wing freak (or any somewhat equivalent phrase) during a BBC news bulletin.

       10 likes

    • Span Ows says:

      you’ll be waiting eternally for that invite to be fulfilled…

         3 likes

      • Mat says:

        No I’m sure Dezzie/nicks emu/scotty/and jim pandey and their new eco loon will be here with armfuls of rebuttals !
        any time now!
        just wait !
        erm I’m off for a tea but they will be here mark my words!

           2 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      That’s the same Jonny Dymond who told you a while back that the Republicans were the Party of old, white America”. After his colleagues censored all news of Mia Love’s and Artur Davis’ appearance (until a day later when somebody upstairs forced an editor to add a line mentioning Love’s existence at the very end of an report about Republican attendees hurling racial abuse and peanuts at a black person), I’s day there’s no point in listening to anything else he has to say on the subject.

      Dymond’s “crazed right wing freak” quip reveals his arrogance and closed-mindedness. He said such a thing because he assumes most of his audience shares his beliefs and will be coming from that perspective. Perhaps he’s right, but it makes that statement no less biased.

         8 likes

      • Guest Who says:

        ‘He said such a thing because he assumes most of his audience shares his beliefs”
        It’s that old ‘speaking for a nation’ presumption again.
        On top of kinda blowing the whole professional objectivity thing out the window from the off.
        Now, remind me, should that presumption prove false, and this is more a ‘got it about … in a very partisan manner… left’ way, what avenues of restitution does one have as a licence fee payer?
        That’s here.
        Much more of this over there, and Aunty’s looking down the barrels of her own Clarke County moment.
        I don’t think Americans take any more kindly to be spoken for without asking than most folk do in Blighty.
        Though I’m sure a cherry vulture can be teased out to dig a hole and ‘prove’ they all would via an LSE/Graun ‘poll’.

           3 likes

        • David Preiser (USA) says:

          They’re pretty much all convinced they do, GW. If you recall, Mardell and the Beeboids at the BBC CoJ behaved the exact same way when discussing things like Warmism and (a misguided version) of Keynesian borrowing-and-spending.

             4 likes

  11. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Hey look: the BBC actually can report the existence of a black woman speaker at the Republican convention. When it’s Condi Rice, they can’t hide it. Of course, she’s a war criminal and Bush minion, so not really a proper black person, right, BBC?

       2 likes

  12. Ron says:

    Now fact-checking… A new low. I’ll be on the lookout for a similar practice with Obama.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19427111

       1 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Which means we now watch what Mardell also to see if he provide similars “balance”.

         0 likes

  13. David Preiser (USA) says:

    In Mardell’s segment on Today, he brought in Salon’s Joan Walsh to provide balance against Republican convention attendees who supported Ryan. I summarized her words as basically calling Ryan a hypocrite.

    But I’ve just found that the reason Mardell brought her in is because she wrote a scathing piece on Ryan for Salon. Read for yourselves the kind of opinion Mardell seeks for balance:

    Paul Ryan’s brazen lies

    Walsh tells a couple lies herself, although Mardell wouldn’t know that. He believes what his Left-wing media friends tell him about this kind of thing. For example, she says Ryan lied about an auto-making plant which actually closed under Bush and not The Obamessiah. Fact: it stayed open and in production until well into 2009, and then closed after His Stimulus. Another obvious lie is Walsh pretending that that Stimulus plus the auto bailout plus ObamaCare plus more and more and more spending hasn’t more than doubled the deficit she tries to pin on TARP and the war efforts.

    But Mardell will definitely be aware that her falsehoods are today’s Narrative for the rest of the MSM. Which is why he had her give her view. He thinks this is a valid viewpoint, and you can be sure he agrees with her every word.

       3 likes

    • Guest Who says:

      ‘Walsh tells a couple lies herself, although Mardell wouldn’t know that.’
      Hmn…
      ‘Ron August 30, 2012 at 5:46 pm
      Now fact-checking… A new low.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19427111

      It would appear that checking of facts at the BBC, along with asking of questions, and holding to account, can be a faucet switched on… and off, at will. Uniquely so.
      Thing is, why do I have to pay for a person to relay only what he wants to hear, often inaccurately, and from a very limited echo chamber at that?

         3 likes

      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        This all comes from Ezra Klein and whatever has replaced his JournoList.

        He started this on his WaPo blog, which he first provided to the AP, which was picked up by the rest of them. Klein has since corrected his lie, although he doesn’t quite put it that way.

        This is the sort of thing which tells us that pretty much the entire BBC staff in the US can easily be replaced by a news aggregator. Or at least they’re desperately in need of new management.

           2 likes

  14. John Anderson says:

    As well as ignoring Mia Love and Artur Davis – black people who gave rousing speeches that are surely worth a proper mention – the BBC has failed to report on the superb speech by another “ethnic” – Susana Martinez, Governor of New Mexico who turned her state’s record deficits into a budget surplus – without raising taxes. Now that is obvious;ly anathema to the BBC.

    But maybe what makes them suppress Martinez is that her life story is the American Dream in essence – hard-working and straightforward Latino parents who risked everything on setting up their own successful business. As she says, “They built that” – whereas all Obama has built is $5 trillion more debt.

    A really cracking speech, strong stuff and really entertaining. It is a disgrace that the BBC won’t even mention such speeches – because they cut right across all the racist stuff that Mardell and others keep spouting as lapdogs for Obama. At the very least, the speeches by Artur Davis, Mia Love and Susana Marinez should be reported as having stirred the convention – and the website should carry links to video of the speeches so the audience can make their own mind up.

    The BBC’s performance on this convention has been despicable.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/30/video-susana-martinez-lays-claim-to-gop-future/#comments

       3 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Is Martinez a “white Hispanic”?

         1 likes

    • John Anderson says:

      And here is another “ethnic” – Ted Cruz. Another powerful family story of how the American Dream opportunity, whereas Obama;s policies simply pile debt on debt on the next generations.

      http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/29/video-ted-cruz-tells-the-story-of-america/

      The speech by Cruz – like the speeches of Mia Love and Artur Davis and Susana Martinez – was largely airbrushed out of the record by liberal media in the US – they ran adverts or ran studio discussions about how nasty and raaaaaacist the Republicans are. Mardell and co are in virtual lockstep with those Obama-enablers. Deep-six the speeches by people from minorities, try to pretend that the Republicans are solely for the whites.

         3 likes

  15. deegee says:

    It may be impossible for Obama to improve on his 2008 share of the Black vote but all other things remaining the same he will lose if there is a significant drop or even a significant number don’t vote this time. The racism accusations are aimed to prevent this.

       1 likes

  16. John Anderson says:

    For anyone wanting to see the razzamatazz of the closing night of the convention – try C-Span.org. No adverts, and reasonable balance compared to so much of the rest of the US media. The speaker line-up looks good, with Marco Rubio introducing Romney at 10pm EST – 3am our time. Speeches and bands start at midnight – with Clint Eastwood as the Mystery Guest ?

       0 likes

  17. John Anderson says:

    Ludicrous item / hatchet job on Romney on the Today programme at about 7.30am – John Humphrys kicks off by saying that Romney’s big problem is that he has a disunited party !

    Surely the news especially since the pick of Paul Ryan for V-P is that the Republican base is strongly united and raring to go. It is Obama’s base that is wobbly this time.

    And then Davis had a drive-past dig at Clint Eastwood’s hilarious speech.

    Agenda ? What agenda ?

       0 likes

  18. Jim Dandy says:

    “Please, defenders of the indefensible, at least show me evidence that the BBC didn’t censor these people’s presence entirely”

    With pleasure – as you mention, Mia Love’s speech is mentioned at the bottom of the BBC article you cite in a rather cack-handed attempt at providing balance in the peanut story.

    “Which should really be the main story, and which should be the addendum?”

    The peanut story is a story. Woman makes well received speech at GOP convention is not a story.

    Condie Rice’s speech was widely reported on the Beeb, so your theory that the BBC is trying to suppress evidence that the GOP is multi-ethnic/not racist does not hold water.

    Incidentally, any evidence that the defacers of the Wikipedia entry are “some lovely Democrats…. ? I couldn’t find any

       0 likes

    • Guest Who says:

      ‘Woman makes well received speech at GOP convention is not a story.
      Then again, ‘Bloke’s wife tells world what she’s not going to be doing’ is HUGE!

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19426564

      Maybe the wrong kind of woman? Or location?
      With BBC editorial it can seem to matter.
      Even when it comes to what they can locate, can’t locate or choose to run with based on no more than the projections of think tanks, sources or handy vox pops that appear to trump watertight oversight in suiting the narrative.
      But your lack of findings are noted. Thank you for contacting BBBC.

         5 likes

    • John Anderson says:

      Stupid comment as usual by Dandy.

      The BBC – from way back when the Tea Party started – has carried the meme that Republicans are all white. But when the convention has a whole series of speeches – mostly very good speeches – by blacks and Hispanics in senior positions in the Party, Condi Rice is the only one who gets any real mention – even on the huge BBC website.

      And even on Condi Rice, I did not hear any real mention of her speech on Radio 4, the BBC’s main news channel.

      For UK issues, the BBC mostly regurgitates the Guardian line. For US stories – it is NYT, WaPo HuffPo and Politico.

      The brief discussion of Romney’on the programme this morning had a Democrat critic – and someone I have never heard of giving faint praise from A “Republican” standpoint. What the so-called Repub said did not chime in any way whatsoever with the general views of really senior Republican commentators – whom the BBC NEVER bring on their programmes.

      The BBC – “Biased Bubble Commentary”

         2 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Jim, you’re simply wrong. In case you haven’t noticed how DB pointed it out, Mia Love’s appearance was censored entirely until sometime after that news brief about the peanut throwing racists went up and that addendum was tacked on at the bottom.

      Considering how the main Narrative of BBC reporting has been that the Republican Party is the party of “old, white America,” and that racism informs nearly all opposition to the President, a black woman – not just any woman, as you tried to falsely spin it – getting a rousing reception ought to be mentioned. If nothing else, at least the BBC could cry tokensim about her. When I wrote the main post, the Mia Love sentence didn’t exist.

      Black Mormon woman makes a speech at a convention portrayed by the mainstream media as being filled with racist Evangelical Christian whites who don’t consider Mormons to be proper Christians, and are too racist to vote for a black person, is news. You may not personally view the Republicans as being like that, but the BBC does, and this blog if full of evidence of their reporting it. We have to go by the BBC’s coverage, not your personal opinion.

      Plus the total censorship of the President’s 2008 campaign co-chair.

      As for Condi Rice, you can’t be serious. She doesn’t count as a proper black person because she was part of the Bush Administration and even though her name was bandied about for the candidacy of both Pres. and VP, Johnny Dymond and Mark Mardell and the usual R5 suspects still portrayed the Republicans and the Tea Party movement as being informed by racism. So Rice cannot be counted as a meaningful black person in their eyes, and mentioning her doesn’t count.

      As for the Wikipedia entry, go cry “false flag” to someone who isn’t going to laugh at such desperate straw-grasping.

         1 likes

  19. Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:

    I happened to be out early this morning and heard the World Service on Radio 4 at about 5.05 a.m.. The bBBC said words to the effect of “now that Mitt Romney has been nominated as Republican candidate, let’s see how he is viewed around the world. So, let’s go to … Kenya!”
    The Kenyan stooge started with “He’s the man who’s criticising President Obama.”
    I didn’t bother listening to any more. Out of more than 200 countries in the world that they could have chosen, the bBBC just happened to pick the one where his father lived and where Obama has had the highest approval ratings. What a coincidence.

       5 likes