Would have thought this was wrong at any time and is merely the BBC pandering to its own inner fantasies:
BBC are ‘wrong’ and insensitive to broadcast book about Margaret Thatcher’s assassination, Tory MP says
BBC bosses are under fire over plans to broadcast a controversial story imaging the assassination of Margaret Thatcher.
Tory backbencher Nadine Dorries said the former prime minster’s family are still “grieving” from her passing last year and said the Corporation should have “taken stock” of their pain.
It comes amid outrage that BBC Radio 4 has picked Hilary Mantel’s controversial new novel for serialisation in its prestigious Book At Bedtime slot.
The Booker Prize winner’s new book, titled The Assassination of Margaret Thatcher, has been criticised for insensitivity over imagining the former Tory leader’s murder so recently after her death.
Mrs Dorries said that the BBC “has a responsibility to the people who pay its license fee”, adding that she would think the same if a book about Tony Blair’s death was broadcast by the Corporation.
On a related subject John Humphrys in the Sunday Times, as referred to in the previous post, said something about Mrs Thatcher which reveals the BBC attitude as to how it conducts interviews with certain people…showing an intent to take the interview down a particular route with a very particular end in mind rather than an open exploration of whatever issues they are concerned with…not to mention the belief that Thatcher was a ‘horrible woman’:
He describes one interview with her as the worst of his career-even though it sounds more like his ultimate throbbing fantasy. It was just before the 1987 election when Thatcher was “at her most powerful. I was wetting myself. The idea was that I would say to her: What is the essence of Christianity? And she was going to say ‘love’, and I was goig to say, oh well, you talk about love but you’re a horrible woman, aren’t you? And she’d resign and all that stuff.” Only she said “choice” and Humphrys had no comeback. “F***! What? Just a minute, prime minister!” He left the interview a “gibbering wreck”.
Just like Thatcher all the more don’t you!
Like I commented on the Vaz thread, they have no shame or subterfuge in admitting their bias. Although the stupid Prue Leaf had a go at Dorries this morning for talking about the Conservative “claim” that the BBC is biased.
Utterly disgusting of the BBC but oh so bloody predictable and as for the Hilarity Muntle person I have nothing but contempt , to me she is just is a crap writer of crap penny dread-fulls !
The BBC should be allowed to broadcast controversial material like this but I would have hoped that in some producer’s mind the thought that perhaps making the victim a Labour PM might have seemed novel.
If Mantel’s purpose was to come over as a deranged idiot then well done to her.
‘Wolf Hall’ is a good read; although I struggled to get past Chapter 1 of the sequel. Perhaps that’s a clue to her ‘deranged’ persona? She needs the BBC help to boost flagging sales?
Sadly I don’t think it is a persona.
Compare and contrast with the grief fest’ over Nelson Mandela.
It is amazing how the Left laud these ambassadors of peace yet the world still continues to burn. They are prominent in their country and perhaps slightly internationally but not to the extent the BBC portrays. I mean South Africa is an oasis of peace and tranquillity isn’t it? No……
Would they have serialised a book portraying Nelson Mandela as the terrorist and communist he was undoubtedly? No.
Time the BBC was shut down.
Dorries response to Leaf, Jowell and Murnaghan, who all thought it a great work of art, was to say “What if it had been about the assassination of Tony Blair?”. I thought that was weak as the extreme-left, like the BBC, disown him for the most part now. I thought at the time she should have said “What if it had been about the assassination of Nelson Mandela?” . That would have caused the lefty trio a few heart palpitations.
Also, relating to Humphrys:-
“Radio 4’s John Humphrys admits BBC ignored mass immigration fearing it would be branded racist by critics.
“John Humphrys says BBC ignored critical stories about mass immigration.
“Radio 4 presenter added that the corporation feared being branded racist.
“He admits he should have questioned Labour ministers more over migrants.
“BBC employees are too ‘sheltered’ to understand the public, he also said.”
By ALASDAIR GLENNIE,
TV CORRESPONDENT FOR THE DAILY MAIL
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2873484/Radio-4-s-John-Humphrys-admits-BBC-ignored-mass-immigration-fearing-branded-racist-critics.html#ixzz3LtQXtycD
Ugly people write ugly things and Mantel is certainly one ugly munter.
The BBC describes their latest outrage as “wickedly witty and mischievous”
I’ll leave it at that except to say that my contempt for the BBC has reached a new height.
She destroyed the evil Empire of Soviet Socialism at home and abroad, so you can understand why the BBC hates her, even though I understand that Labour will outlaw hatred if they win the election.
Even the politically correct failure, Theresa May, seems to have sympathy for socialists when it comes to Thatcher being nasty to socialism.
Today, most Journalists, Intellectuals and Politicians sympathetic to Thatcher are censored by the BBC.
The BBC now regards Russell Brand as the only intellectual now worth interviewing. I think its because the W1A morons are impressed by his Gobbledygook. Like all people with low intelligence, if they hear something they cannot understand with lots of big words strung together, they think of it as a lecture by an intelligent person.
And to prove the point, I haven’t heard any of the so called BBC comedians make anything about the fact that Brand has won this years, Plain English, Gobbledygook award.
Today the Evil Empire is the BBC, so just as Churchill was hated by the National Socialists and Thatcher was hated by the Soviet Socialists, so must anyone hated by the BBC Socialists, be a true Christian disciple of Choice. Vote UKIP.
About time we did a serialisation of the Savile Days at the BBC…let the linen suits in Salford try and be “edgy” or “provocative” about that one.
Or about how Live Aid led to Sharia in Darfur…with a “soupcon of fiction” to “ensure the narrative”.
F888 Off BBC… Thatcher really should have nobbled them when she had the chance…
A Droid PR bunny defended the choice of Mantel’s drivel with…
‘We will not shy away from the controversial subject matter…’
Oh what bravery from the droids.
Pakistani rape gangs obviously not a controversial subject matter then.
Probably the lowest point for the Book at Bedtime selectors was the BBC’s favourite muzzie copper Ali Dezai and his autohagiography. Unreadable, unlistenable, and karma happened when Dezai was banged up for three years.
The writer could have done a series.
It all flew over the head of G.Brown.by G.Brown .
B.Liar B.Liar by Tony Bliar,
Saving the life of private Saville,
DC Comic tales by David Cameron
Tales of the expected by Nick Clegg
I hope when this is broadcast , `The Angel Of Death ` passes over all beeboids & removes their first born . Well that`s what they were claiming Maggie did every day for 11.5 years, so this would be justice against the Evil Bastards . I hope as they all pass on ,its a painful ending in Hell .
Oh come on give the BBC a chance . I was the same when I was six and loathed and feared Mrs Gloria , a dinner lady at my primary school .
I wonder when the bBC will knock out a program critical of;
Mohammed,
Gays
Women
Blacks
Fat bastards
‘Fat bastards’ ????
Every day. Didn’t you know the obese are Evil Incarnate?
Please keep up at the back. ;p
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2873849/STEPHEN-GLOVER-BBC-broadcast-hateful-tripe-icon-Left.html
‘Curteis, having been commissioned by the Corporation to write a piece about the Falklands War five years after the 1982 conflict, produced something which showed Margaret Thatcher in a human light.
After he refused to make what he later called ‘highly tendentious’ and ‘actionable’ additions ordered by the BBC’
That would be the BBC that claims to respect editorial integrity and independence, and where senior management never has a quiet word in a corridor of the record that no one remembers.
‘ Sack of rats’ seems generous.
It is the epitome of propaganda and censorship, with force funding compelled on the population injury on top of the insult to democracy.
Hmm so BBC how about a book reading of ‘The Killing of David Wilkie’? no ? shocked! not !
For balance, the impartial BBC could do one on the assassination of a Labour leader.
Say, Hugh Gaitskell. But then, the type of people who did actually assassinate him in 1963, had the same political beliefs as the BBC types and Hilary Mantel, today.
So this true story is still effectively censored by the establishment.
The same thing would happen today if Frank Field was leader of the Labour Party.