Yes, this IS going to be a long series but with the General Election campaign now well and truly underway, I think we should take the time to dissect exactly how the BBC covers it. Today started in fine fettle this morning by contrasting on the one hand Conservative “confusion” over tax policy for married people with Labour vision to help our farmers. Nice, especially when one considers how Labour has screwed up farming over the past 12 years. I hope any farmers reading this will share just how wonderful Labour has been for their industry but in the BBC worldview, Labour offers hope whereas those bad evil Conservatives will return us to the wilderness of the Thatcher years. Vote Labour, you know it makes sense….
B-BBC ELECTIONWATCH
Bookmark the permalink.
Radio 5 were going on the ‘Marriage’ issue today with plenty of lefties slagging of the Tories.
In fairness the Tories really need to wake up to the fact that every policy they release the BBC will attack it across their whole output whilst the scum in the Liebour party are allowed to spout endless lies without any attempt by the BBC to get to the truth.
Really? You must have been listening to a completely different Today programme from me. The coverage of Labour’s plans for agriculture (covered at about 8.50) were balanced with reporting of the Conservatives ‘fair prices for food producers’ Ombudsman policy at the same time. The discussion of the Tories marriage tax mess up yesterday was with the founder of a Conservative website (pro-Tory bias surely?!) Oh and there was also a lengthy discussion as to whether Alistair Darling’s use of Treasury civil servants to try to discredit the Tory’s tax plans was against regulations.
D- Must try harder.
Paulo, yes, as you suggested Martin was listening to a completely different programme to you. Martin said 5Live and you’re talking about the Today Programme which is on Radio 4. Oops!
Ryan, I can see how the comment system made it look a little confusing but I was actually commenting on the original post regarding this morning’s Today Program rather than Martin’s reply!
Paulo
I commented on what I HEARD. I did not have the time – nor indeed desire – to listen to two hours of Today. The comments I made relate to the 7-7.30am period.
I know what you mean, I heard the first 10 minutes of Any Questions once and none of the questions attacked the government. I didn’t bother with the other 40mins as I could tell the direction it was taking….
Do you honestly think that 2 three minute pieces (one an interview with a Tory website founder and one on the recent history of farming policy following the announcement of a new Government initiative) in the first half hour of a two hour programme amount to bias? You may want to want to start thinking ‘quality over quantity’ rather than putting a new post up every time you listen to any bit of BBC programming….
Interesting that Sky News have pointed out this screw up by Mong and one of his henchmen over the pants bomber. The DT has the story here (also picked up by Guido). But needless to say our favourite drug addicts haven’t mentioned it. Why? Because it makes McMong look an even bigger twat than he already is (and a liar).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/6934672/White-House-accuses-Downing-Street-of-making-a-mistake-over-intelligence-claim.html
Here’s a quote off Guido
“…Alan Johnson has been forced to schedule an emergency statement at 15.30. Sky News’s Joey Jones said he took no pleasure in describing it as “an awful briefing“. Another serious blunder by Brown’s slapdash spokesman, the Lobby have completely lost respect for Brown’s mouthpiece…”
Over at the BBC zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
What shock, BBC 1PM news going with the CIA report about the bombing in Afghanistan rather than the story I posted about above.
The BBC hiding McMong’s incompetence yet again.
DV:P Can you keep bumping this thread up the blog? I think this thread will be a good one to keep current to highlight the BBC’s distortion of the election.
Paulo
I comment on what I hear. What d you comment on?
David
I like to get the full facts before making any comment, but thats just me.
I assume that had you only listened to the Today program between 8.30 and 9.00 you would have heard the article on the Labour misuse of Civil Servants and the coverage of the Tories food Ombudsman plan and written a firey post accusing the BBC of pro-Tory bias?
Paulo,
Please have a listen to Jim Naughtie’s interview with Hilary Benn at 8.10 (as linked to by David), then listen to his interview with Benn’s opposite number Nick Herbert at 6.51. This is not available on the Today website, so you’ll need to follow this link to Radio 4’s Listen Again page:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qj9z
The interviews couldn’t be more different.
The interview with Benn was friendly and began with a joke. The interview with Herbert was very rude and frosty. (There were no jokes.) The Conservative was strongly contradicted and constantly interrupted by Naughtie – unlike the Labour politician. And the Tory got substantially less time too.
I think if you listen to both interviews you’ll better see the point of David’s post.
Unlike the Benn interview, there’s only 7 days left to hear the Herbert interview. It will not be archived on the Today website. So listen soon or you’ll lose you chance forever!
The BBC, with its predilection to approvingly treat Britain as Labour’s one-party state, ignores this on its website:
“Chris Grayling says that the proposed Islam4UK march in Wootton Bassett should be prevented”
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2010/01/chris-grayling-says-that-the-proposed-islam4uk-march-in-wootton-bassett-should-be-prevented.html
I think in 2010 none of what the BBC say will make the slightest difference: Labour are in for a damn good hiding.
Britain in 1997 was a vastly different animal to that of today. The Internet has proved to be the best place to reveal the inconsistencies and lies of the Labour Government. The collective memory recall of the posters and bloggers is far more persuasive and damning than that of any of the professional nodding donkeys in the MSM.
I truly believe that the Internet will bring down this soviet style Government.
What a joke the BBC 6PM news was. How did they cover th esotry abour McMong and his spokesman talking bollocks about the pants bomber? Well they shove dit away to near the end of the news then spun it as an anti CIA story, not Obama oh and a plus for McMong. How does the BBC think it can lie like this and get away with it?
Luckily Sky and other broadcasters are all over it.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Detroit-Bomber-PMs-Spokesman-Says-No-Suggestion-US-Did-Not-Act-On-Intelligence/Article/201001115514578?lpos=Politics_First_Poilitics_Article_Teaser_Regi_0&lid=ARTICLE_15514578_Detroit_Bomber%3A_PMs_Spokesman_Says_No_Suggestion_US_Did_Not_Act_On_Intelligence
Paulo’s “Today”
“a lengthy discussion as to whether Alistair Darling’s use of Treasury civil servants to try to discredit the Tory’s tax plans was against regulations”
– Lengthy as in just over 3 minutes 8.20 – 8.23
– discussion as in an interview with the leader of the civil servants trade union, in which the interviewer took the government position. Only 3 questions/comments were posed
1.”What upset you about yesterday?”
2. “The government were presenting facts.”
3. “Did any civil servant complain to you?”
So the BBC did nothing to suggest that it thought there had been Paulo’s “the Labour misuse of Civil Servants”
Paulo
“The full facts”? So, one must listen to the entire Today programme in order to comment on an individual item? Is that the new rule? Listen, the bias is visceral but then again again so is the denial.
Now that election season in the UK has begun in earnest, the BBC is going all out to cover all the angles. Except one. The Spectator is pushing a story about a possible Cabinet resignation in protest against Gordon Brown’s leadership. So are other media outlets, and they aren’t shy about it.
Normally, this amount of low-level buzz would be enough for the BBC to breathe heavily over a possible party split – if it were the Tories. Of course, as it’s Labour….
The BBC will never run any story that might be bad for Liebour.
Don’t be too hard on Paulo he may just have brought to our attention the very faint stirrings of a Damascene conversion on the Today programme. Somehow I doubt it though.
I would ask Paulo of the points you heard discussed on the Today programme I trust that you will confirm that the items selected for regular repeat in news summaries across the BBC empire the were “Tory confusion over tax breaks for couples” and “Labour says £xx million hole found in Tory proposals”. I do not think that the “Tory proposals” were actually listed prior to that point being made.
Many others rely on the principle of “if you hear it often enough it must be true” so full marks to the (down with the Tories) BBC for the regular repeats of said points without context. Come to think of it that is where 90% of the population probably get their view on global warming from!.
The power of those who select what you see and hear is worrying, isn’t it.
So it turns out that yesterday’s rumor was only half right: rather than a Cabinet minister resigning in protest, a couple of already ex-Cabinet ministers are making the protest.
Now that the actual move is out in the open – the letter from Hoon and Hewitt calling for a secret ballot vote on Mr. Brown’s leadership – the BBC is taking every opportunity to play it down. They sure find time for every Labour voice in support of Mr. Brown. Can it be that there are no other Labour MPs who would like a leadership change? No, all you need to know is that Hoon has form trying to start a leadership “coup”, so this latest one is nothing to worry about.
Even Nick Robinson is trying to keep his distance from allowing that this could be serious, although he does admit on his blog the possibility of a leadership change at some point. Too bad he spent his TV face time reading out a message from Lord Mandelson playing this down, unable to relay his communications (and you he has them) with those looking to remove Mr. Brown. But no, Robinson doesn’t like to rock the boat with his contacts, if he can help it.