The Guardian’s Guardian Guardian

Is the Guardian acting as the Guardian of the media guardian Ofcom or is it actually being critical of it?

Whichever, it comes to something when even the Guardian notices that Ofcom is jampacked to the gills with BBC types which kind of makes a mockery of Government plans to use Ofcom as the BBC’s new independent regulator….

For what is this monster, as the scales drop from tabloid eyes? Its supreme chair, the monarch of the top board, is a former director of BBC policy planning. The subsidiary content board that will handle the vast bulk of BBC regulation is currently chaired by Nick Pollard, a former BBC (and almost everything else) hand recalled to the colours to report on the corporation’s Jimmy Savile coverage.

Those who sit alongside him include a former BBC news and current affairs (Wales); a former BBC head of news and current affairs (Northern Ireland); a former BBC controller of public policy; a couple of experienced BBC freelance broadcasters – and now, recruited to run the content-board show, a former deputy boss of the BBC newsroom and editor of News 24.

And if, perchance, the next row is yet another Brexit bomb, then note that Sharon White, Ofcom’s chief executive, is the wife of Robert Chote, the head of the Office for Budget Responsibility whose forecasts of post-EU financial hardship so outraged mighty media Leavers. What’s more, Sharon was a top Treasury mandarin whisked over to Ofcom on George Osborne’s watch – and just look who sits there at her boardroom side: Graham Mather, chairman of the European Policy Forum. Cue nest-of-elite-vipers diatribe.

Look at Leveson, with his almost obsessive anxiety to keep newspaper editors or political players away from press regulation. Then ask yourself whether Ofcom’s nominating committee (choosing candidates, giving ministers only approval rights for topmost posts) is Leveson-compliant.

Will it effect the deliberations of Ofcom?  Consider that the Cardiff school of journalism is also jampacked with BBC types and like-minded souls, and then consider that they declared, after lengthy study and thought, LOL, that the BBC was right-wing.  The BBC must be laughing their socks off.

Whatever next?  Perhaps the BBC will  notice all the criticism of the supposed  new independent, government aproved, Press regulator, Impress…that monstrous child of the spank-loving Max Mosley…and jampacked to the gills with people who hate the right-leaning Press such as the Sun, the Mail and the Express….their greatest desire seemingly to close down all such papers…a desire expressed in quite extreme and blatantly not impartial language….as exposed on Guido and in the Press over the last couple of weeks.  Just that the BBC doesn’t seem to have noticed that particular aspect of those who run Impress….kind of crucial though one might think…a regulator who hates certain publications and wants nothing less than to close them down…fair hearing or kangaroo court?


The Guardian unfortunately reverts to type as it hilariously pronounces that LBC’s/BBC’s James O’Brien could be ‘the face of 2016’. as he declares that Brexit was the Devil’s work [he being pro-EU natch] and that it is a nothing less than a darkness called ‘white supremacy’ that is feeding the monstrous populism that is on the rise across the world.  Wonder what he made of the Arab Spring, that ‘populist’ uprising that was celebrated by the BBC and, funnily enough, carried out by Arabs and not the white supremacists that so perturb the imaginings of our sad little James O’Brien.  Note this little post-truth snippet from the Guardian’s love-in for O’Brien...’O’Brien was one of the few interviewers to rattle Farage in the past – the then Ukip leader curtailed a 2014 interview in which the presenter tried to press him on his expenses.’  Really?  No, what actually happened was that Farage wiped the floor with O’Brien and even extended the interview way beyond the agreed time…and it was his aide, not himself, that finally ended the interview/kangaroo court/lynching/crassbunkumnonsense.


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

6 Responses to The Guardian’s Guardian Guardian

  1. JosF says:

    When it comes to the BBC and Al-Guardian one swallow does not a summer make and when it comes to news, current affairs and journalism I have found Madame Za-Za the fourtune teller and her crystal ball to be more believable and accurate than either the BBC or Al-Guardian. When it comes to facts, bais and believablity both the BBC and Al-Guardian are leopards who cannot {and it is increasingly evident they are unwilling to} change their spots


  2. All Lives Matter says:

    The Guardian, the BBC, and other liberal media outlets have been crying wolf for so long about supposed racism/misogyny/white supremacy/Islamophobia/imperialism that nobody takes them seriously any more. Of course, if these people had their way then there would be literally no dissent to their treacherous, anti-democratic, Leninist policies aside from people on the fringes, who the people would have no choice but to turn to. Then again, that’s what the like of the Guardian think has already happened with Brexit and Trump, which speaks volumes for how extreme and unhinged the mainstream left has become.


  3. Richard Pinder says:

    My understanding was that both Barbara Castle in the first Brexit Referendum, and the Queen in the second Brexit Referendum, both supported Brexit because of a multiracial organisation called the Commonwealth, while a White Supremacist would naturally support the European Union, which is what Barbara Castle suspected was the reason she lost the Oxford Debate. As only Race, not Language or Culture unite the people of Europe.


    • taffman says:

      The Commonwealth and the USA – there lies our future trade and salvation. History shows that Europe and its nations have always been a disaster.


      • Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate says:

        Napoleon shouldn’t be in that group he got carried away but he was in favour of a merit based secular society and many of his conquests were in reaction to the aristocratic elites then controlling Europe who had vowed to smash Republican France and restore France to the European Aristocratic elites (Monarchy). Napoleon was not involved in the Reign of Terror, he came later.


  4. Philip_2 says:

    OFCOM will not be able to control the BBC (but it is quite possible thet the BBC could control both OFCOM and the PRESS). I would alert all Biased BBC readers to the distinct possibility that the freedom-of-the press is being undermined (again) by Max Mosley and his leftie supporters – who all come out of the woodwork as hating (and wish to ban) The Daily Mail (particularly as being ‘right wing extremists), The Telegraph for exposing (Islamic Trojan Horse School abuse of school governers) and The Times, (for campaigns revealing both the failures of-the-left in Yorkshire a hidden ‘acceptance’ of Islamic cultural sexual abuses in Rotherham and the systematic ‘cover-up’ by The Council and Police in the area was exposed. (Despite threats by the Police and the local Councils to stop this being made National News). We have a lot to thank the PRESS against the ‘establishment’ cover up which is never ending. You only have to listen to the BBC for 10 mins to learn ‘nothing’ will be learnt as the abuses (sexual or financial) are deeply and ingrained in the BBC mindset that prefer such news to be ‘hidden’ from public knowledge.

    Fight back. Say YES to a free press!
    Max Mosley has long held a grudge against the press. Ever since it was reported he took part in a ‘Nazi-style’ orgy, he has attempted to use his considerable wealth to stifle press freedom and to try and make sure the press dances to his tune. And his tune is not a happy, carefree scherzo – more like the most depressing funeral march you will ever have the misfortune to hear…

    (from SPIKED)
    That would affect not only national newspapers such as the Sun, Star, Times or Telegraph. It would also be a sword hanging over the heads of smaller independent publications, from Private Eye to spiked. Section 40 is potentially a DIY censors’ charter, giving the Max Mosleys of the world a licence to take legal action with virtual impunity in an effort to suppress true stories that they want to keep secret. Hacked Off and other supporters of the new regulatory system claim it offers both ‘sticks and carrots’ to the press, to encourage them to submit to regulation by Royal Charter.

    The BBC would effectively control what is printed in the the press, this is the ultimate leftie and liberal ambition, full control of ALL PRESS MEDIA. The BBC has already suggested that local papers should only print BBC ‘authorised’ news (for free). Its a chilling reminder at what is at stake here.

    Section 40 is a charter for all those who have something to hide to behave like absolute monarchs. They can threaten, bully, and sue with impunity. They will never have to pick-up the bill. Any corrupt local official will have a licence to do anything they think they can get away with – and get away with it they will! (if they succeed)

    So OFCOM is important (yes) but THIS IS FAR MORE URGENT….
    The public consultation closes on 10 January, and you can let the Government know that if it implements these proposals it will not be acting in your name.

    Don’t let the LEFT rob us of our free press! Max Mosley is already funded by the government to appease leftie whingers who want to control the media. If you read it the LEVESON report, what is aleardy being proposes is so extreme that it would mean the BBC would be the ONLY NEWS SOURCE IN THE UK – protected by its (favoured) Charter and fully funded by the taxpaper despite its overwhelming bias and monopoly on news.

    Say NO to section 40 and Leveson Part 2.
    Press freedom, the lifeblood of democracy, is under attack.
    Sign and protest. Don’t let Max Mosley an his chums at the BBC get away with it.