EVAN A CLUE; BETRAYING THE BBC’S HIGH STANDARD OF BIAS

By | |

Biased BBC stalwart Graeme Thompson aka Hippiepooter writes;

“I was alerted to this
Evan Davis interview with the Prime Minister on the TODAY programme this Friday
via the Daily Mail.
 PM
ROWS WITH TODAY SHOW A swallow does not make a Summer, but it is a chink of light
that Cameron got short with the partisan line Davis was taking.
 Davis
was like a cocker spaniel trying to impersonate a rottweiler/fox cross,
ungamely trying to cling onto his Bullingdon Club bone of contention in
pursuance of Labour’s attack line on Cameron as ‘Flashman’.  It comes about 15 minutes in, but please
don’t think Davis
asked Cameron three times about the Bullingdon Club because he was trying to
equate Bullingdon Club antics with the riots. 
He assured us he wasn’t.
 Craig mentioned in the comments the other week that this
Labour attack line was also used by Paddy O’Connell on ‘Broadcasting House’
against London Mayor Johnson.  I wonder
if B-BBC readers have spotted any
other of Labour’s BBC houseboys
looking for bias brownie points with Miliband?
 What appals so much about Evan Davis is not just that he is
biased but he is patently inept as well. 
Whatever else one might say about the BBC’s
dogs of bias such as Humphrys, Paxman, Naughtie etc, they are not inept, they
are heavyweights.  If they were impartial
they would more than merit their places at the BBC.  One can only conclude that the only reason a
light-weight like Evan Davis is on the TODAY programme is because of his
bias.  Being homosexual can’t have done
him any harm either.  A double whammy for
career progression on BBC Planet
Gramsci.  Or maybe I’m being unfair?  Maybe Davis
retains enough sense of shame to make his bias so lame and forlorn?
 When one harks back to the not so long ago days of Alexander
MacLeod and Gordon
Clough, when gentlemen journalists sought to edify the British public, then
looks at the adversarial dross that the BBC
serves up today on programmes like TODAY and Newsnight, one cannot help but
grieve.  One grieves the lack of gravitas
and public duty, and the lack of action by Parliament.  The next time a Gramscian hack on the BBC asks the Prime Minister if misdoings in the
financial sector contribute to the climate of immorality that leads to riots,
one hopes the Prime Minister rejoins that 40 years of the BBC pushing Marxist narratives and undermining
patriotism and authority has led to the moral breakdown that saw England’s main
cities overrun with lawlessness in August.”

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to EVAN A CLUE; BETRAYING THE BBC’S HIGH STANDARD OF BIAS

  1. john in cheshire says:
    September 4, 2011 at 6:36 pm

    Brian Redhead, Robin Day. Both socialists in outlook to my mind. But both performed their duties at the bbc with as much impartiality as one might expect from anyone. Jack De Manio, a wonderful presenter of the today programme. It is on the back of the reputation that these people that the likes of humphrys, naughty(sick -sic), davies and webb have climbed and dissembled. They are fakes and should be treated as such. None of them is worthy of the descriptor of journalist. Propagandists or sons of Lord Hawhaw more like.

       0 likes

    • hippiepooter says:
      September 4, 2011 at 9:20 pm

      I always regarded Brian Redhead as screamingly bent just like Humphrys and Co.

      Robin Day on the other hand, as much as I didn’t like his ‘gladitorial’ style which afforded carte blanche to the likes of Paxman to behave like complete twats, at least he was even-handed in that style, like Andrew Neill is

         0 likes

  2. Millie Tant says:
    September 4, 2011 at 10:50 pm

    The first thing I didn’t like about that is that Davis didn’t have the common courtesy to say Good morning, Prime Minister.

    Instead he got Good morning to you. 

    That shows you what he is like before he even asks a question.  Anyway, knowing from previous on-air encounters what he is like in terms of lacking manners, I suppose we ought to be thankful that he didn’t greet the PM as Mate.

    As for attempting to ambush the PM with the Bullingdon Club, well, how petty and puerile that makes the Beeboids look. That silly oaf with the silly voice and array of rings and chains should grow up.  

       0 likes

    • Pirran says:
      September 5, 2011 at 12:34 am

      The trouble is “Call me Dave” started all this himself. He can hardly argue that due deference should be shown for the position (certainly not the man) when he has the open-necked gravitas of a fading ’80’s pop star.

      If he stopped presenting the PM as a Breakfast TV pundit, even the Evans of this world might be forced to take him seriously. Fat chance of that, obviously.

         0 likes

      • Millie Tant says:
        September 5, 2011 at 1:12 pm

        He didn’t Call him Dave, though. So that didn’t work, eh?

        Even if the PM doesn’t want to stand on ceremony or expect people to be deferential it is still the case that institutions and officialdom preserve a degree of formality and decorum when addressing the PM.  That includes broadcasters. It is standard in interviews to start off addressing him as Prime Minister. That includes the Beeboid Corporation. I can’t imagine those polite Dimbleby boys not doing so.

           0 likes

  3. David Preiser (USA) says:
    September 5, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    Are the Today producers and Davis paying attention to the questions they’re asking, or just coming up with angles from which to attack Cameron, regardless of how much sense they make?

    First Davis wants to know if, because Britain used force to remove Ghaddafi, we should equally want to remove Assad.  But then later he tries to get Cameron to admit that the UK didn’t actually contribute all that much?

    So which is it?  If Britain didn’t do much, then it’s pretty lame to talk about the justification for Britian to be removing dictators from power.  Then it was on to digging up the aircraft carrier issue, and the closing attack was on defense spending.  Sometimes, the BBC is in favor of increased defense spending, redistributing money from supporting the poorest and most vulnerable to pay for a bit of Western Imperialism.  Did you run of munitions in Libya?  Seriously?

    And then the riots.  Cameron’s mistake was to use the term “moral boundaries”, which is anathema to the post-modern relativist BBC.  Davis tried to include the banks in it as a will o’ the wisp argument to distract the PM from his main point.  At least Cameron was sharp enough to realize it.  Good for him for calling the BBC on it.  I know he made that exact point recently.

    Davis stated that he meant – and by extension he’s defending the BBC position here – that most of the rioters were merely otherwise innocent and law-abiding citizens momentarily caught up in the moment, and there is no real cause for concern.  Is this fact or fiction?  Do we know the percentages yet, or is Davis claiming an unsubstantiated assumption as fact?

    Can anyone tell me if Bullingdon boys had to pay (or their parents had to pay) for the damages they caused in their drunken revelry?  If so, wouldn’t that undermine Davis’ class-war point.

    The whole segment was a laundry list of Labour attack points.  If they’re going to robustly challenge the Government (something Today darlings almost never do to Labour figures these days), they could at least come up with an original angle.  The last question was even openly presented as a Labour talking point, FFS.

    Having said all that, I do hope there was no giggling at the back when Davis opened his attack on the aircraft carrier issue by saying that he had just been talking to a young French sailor.  As one does.

       0 likes

    • hippiepooter says:
      September 5, 2011 at 6:03 pm

      The huge tragedy is that the issue of defence cuts cries out for forensic examination.  If Davis hadn’t been so determined to score propaganda points for Labour instead of doing his country a service his interview with Cameron would have been a great 20 minute opportunity to hold the Prime Minister to due account.  Cameron spoke some very well crafted and highly polished twaddle on the impact of defence cuts.  True patriots like MacLeod and Clough would have really honed in with all due courtesy and propriety on just how disasterous such cuts are for a nation at war.      
           
      The bit about the French sailor passed me by.  Priceless!

         0 likes