Following on from my Mandela post, I see the Telegraph reports that BBC staff who went on strike yesterday said they were prepared to return to their desks if Nelson Mandela died, however the staff’s generosity stopped there.
After news that the 94-year-old was in hospital broke, union leaders declared that in “the sad event of his death, and for BBC news coverage of that story only” the staff would postpone the strike. However when the strikers were asked whether the ailing Lady Thatcher, scourge of the unions in the 1980s, would be treated in the same manner, there was a marked change of approach. Both Bectu and the National Union of Journalists said simply that they had not considered what they would do in the event of the 87-year-old former prime minister’s untimely death.
The visceral loathing of the brand of Conservatism that Margaret Thatcher espoused is clear. The comrades will rush back to ensure the sanctification of Mandela but their demonisation of Thatcher continues. Given how blatant this – is in what way can we expect them to be unbiased when they then cover stories in which authentic conservative values are in play?
Black arm bands will be mandatory for at least three months after Mandela heads on up to ‘Da Great Waddie Melon Patch In De Sky’
… and how does he get to ‘da great waddie melon patch in de sky’?
That’s right, on de big ribba boat.
They did not consider a response to the death of Thatcher because it was Mandela in hospital yesterday not her.
I know that the concept of fairness is the essence of this sites campaign against the BBC – but perhaps Alan you should take fairness into account when penning your own pieces.
It is David, who penned this. And that relevance is in the response of the Unions to the question posed, as the DT posits. WHY do BBC staff consider it a no-brainer to break their strike and present death of a foreign politician and not that of a British one?
By your own argument they would of course have returned to work if only to espouse their “visceral loathing”. I am sure they would also have returned to work if the Queen died but again based on current information that would be something else they did not consider yesterday.
Piffle.
Nobody believes that, Albaman. The BBC already has plans put into place, and you know it. The reason the NUJ mouthpiece demurred is because he was following the advice of his and all our mothers: If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all. They all know perfectly well what they’d do, and so do you. He just couldn’t admit it openly.
The fact that an organization of professional journalists couldn’t easily say that of course BBC staff would put the placards down and do their jobs if a former PM passed away is indeed a tribute to the character of BBC staff.
You are correct. We all know that they would have returned to work which makes the original post by David rather insignificant and the question posed by the reporter a bit stupid.
But you have no comment on the NUJ’s reaction? Everybody is wrong except those who wouldn’t say the Beeboids would of course return to work?
sorry albaman but what planet are you living on,the unions and the BBC hate Mrs T. Fact .
They hate the fact that she was voted in by the masses.The unions hate the masses unless they pay their subs,and even then are just going through the motions whilst having fleeced them with their large salaries and pensions.
Compare the BBC and the Unions in the way they act and treat the people who pay them. Its about time we had another maggie before its too late.
I for one will morn the passing of the great lady,one because she pulled this country up,two stuck two fingers up to the EU.
If you had a poll asking people would they have DC or MT as prime minister i think most sane people would say MRS T.
‘most sane people’
I see what you did there.
It will be interesting if the weekend shift does.
”Both Bectu and the National Union of Journalists said simply that they had not considered what they would do in the event of the 87-year-old former prime minister’s untimely death.’
‘their demonisation of Thatcher continues.’
Can you explain how you get from the first sentence to the second? As explained, its Mandela who’s in hospital, and it would be a big story if he died. I know how you’d like to spin this, but I’m afraid this post makes no sense.
They would (of course) return to work if Nelson Mandela died, but if Margaret Thatcher died they would have to consider it.
Try putting the second sentence after the one that directly preceded it in the text (rather than a random one from earlier in the passage):
‘The comrades will rush back to ensure the sanctification of Mandela but their demonisation of Thatcher continues.’
There we go, see?
this cult of Mandela has rather passed me by I’m afraid.
Can one of the trolls explain to me (in no more than a small paragraph) what he has actually achieved.
Sure, Jack. It must be a real stumper of a question, eh? As if obituaries haven’t already been written (one for public consumption, and one for sharing internally as they stagger around the halls of the new offices filled with empty champagne bottles), and plans aren’t already in place, since this would hardly be unexpected. What’s stopping the NUJ mouthpiece from paying equal tribute to the character of BBC staff by saying something like, “I’m sure BBC staff would equally be professional, etc.”?
And why would Margaret Thatcher dying be less of a story than Mandela? He’s been ill for some time, this isn’t out of the blue either.
With Gods help, maybe Thatcher will live long enough to see the BBC broken up, along with the NHS.
Certainly her influence will forever surpass that of whoever heads these useless unions at the moment.
The Lefts contempt and ever rising anger at an old lady who tried to do the right thing for this nation, tells you all you need to know about the new breed of publicly funded nasties that are in positions of influence.
Luckily enough of us lived through their rise, and will be ready always to deal with them. I hate them-and will do all I can to ensure that they`re stuffed and binned at every opportunity.
For I too was that idiot O Farrell and as thick as Owen Jones in the 80s….what`s the excuse for the lefties these days?
Yesterday I stumbled across something in a book O’Farrell had written that touched on Henry VIII and the Reformation. He argued that Henry and Lord Chancellor Thomas Cromwell seized on the idea of dissolution of the monasteries as a way of grabbing money – “just like Thatcher seized on the idea of privatisation”
They HATE her, dragging her name in at every opportunity, relevant or not.
Talking of young Owen Shoutie… he was asked why he hated Thatcher so much given he wasn’t alive when she was PM and he replied that it was for what she did to his family.
Yeah right.
Let him add up the value of all the ex-council houses owned by ‘his family’, then deduct the cost from that figure. *That’s* what Thatcher did for his family.
Gobby little shite.
I was brought up on a council estate in Oldham in the 80’s, my dad was unemployed, we were skint….on our arses.
Do I blame “Fatcher” for my poor upbringing?
No, and I didn’t then, I blame, and blamed my alcoholic father.
“Fatcher” was not the cause of poverty for people, people were the cause of their own poverty, as they are now.
Shouty Jones wants to wind his neck in and look at his family instead of “Fatcher”, the little shit.
khawuleth’umshini wami
(please bring me my machine gun)
Jacob Zuma’s election song.
BBC metroplitan liberals at News 24 appear a little embarassed when they tell about the US TV phenomenom that is : The Bible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_%28TV_series%29
They go all ‘some my say’ in us. Plenty of that BBC balance is served up: critics have panned it, Satan is an Obama-looky-likey, commercial exploitation, et al.
But this is Holy Week. So hourly updates on the ‘steady progress’ of Saint Nelson of Mandela come without a hint of fear or favour.
The Satan character supposedly looks like the President. This is the only picture I’ve found that doesn’t look more like they were ripping off Palpatine from Star Wars.
In the mail it says that the NUJ had contingency plans if Mandela popped his cloggs while they were on strike I assume they went something like this:
‘Open door. Enter BBC offices. Sit at desk. Switch on computer. Make coffee. Have a chat about how terrible it all is, even worse than David Miliband going to America. Sit down at desk. Start crying. Demand counselling. Blame FATCHAAAA …
Frau Adolfina Thatchler, surely? I hate it when moronic Lefty comedians, who are too young to remember the 1980s, refer to the “Thatcher Junta”.
Being locked up for decades doesn’t seem to have done Mandela any harm does it? It seems to be the only thing he ever achieved and even then it wasn’t his doing.
94 eh? I bet Stompie Mackenzie and many, many others would have accepted 20 years in poky just so they could live ’til they were 94. Sadly all they got from the ANC was an unmarked grave.
There are seven billion people on the planet and hardly any of them will hear of President Mandela’s death via the BBC.
And I don’t think a BBC news strike will prevent anyone in the UK hearing of the sad event either, so I can only conclude that these BBC strikers are so vain that they think we need their well-rehearsed version.
Nelson Mandela’s ANC was a Soviet/Communist backed organisation.
Margaret Thatcher declared war on the Soviet/Communist backed militant Trade Unions post 1979.
Hence the politically “impartial” BBC love of one and hatred of the other.
Over 100 million murdered to achieve economic, moral, social and environmental catastrophe – and the BBC takes the Socialist side.
Words cannot describe the deep and intense loathing I hold for the murderous and morally bankrupt ideologues within this Blatantly Biased Corporation.
Come the counter-revolution…….