‘Tory! Tory! Tory!’ (3)

My previous posting‘s video clips — showing the BBC’s Nick Robinson in unappealing action within various televised settings — will no doubt have left a nasty taste in many a reader’s mouth. So let’s start this posting with something that is not only much more pleasant, but which also answers a friend’s question, just received:

What music was that on the old Brian Redhead programme?‘, he asks. ‘I’ve never heard it before!

Well, here — so that everyone can now hear it! — is the entire number from which that little bit of theme music was drawn. As I indicated, it’s by André Messager (1853-1929) — a highly capable and versatile musician active in many fields. Happily, I’ve been able to find a YouTube video that, besides containing the piece I need, also includes a photo of the dear old fossil in his later years…

You’re welcome.

Now, I hope our musical interlude took that nasty taste away — because I’m about to bring it back, and worse besides. I haven’t finished with Nick Robinson; I haven’t finished with the BBC; and I haven’t finished with the ‘postbag’ that those two previous items have already generated.

Let’s have a look into the postbag now…

Well, I’m too modest to go into details; but lots of the feedback is positive: out there in social media land there is no shortage of deeply comprehending rage about the BBC’s elite-serving eagerness not just to make hay endlessly over trivial and even personal issues that obscure important political matters, but also to conceal altogether topics of major significance that would reflect badly upon the UK state and its allies on the one hand, and upon the Conservative party and its lackeys very specifically on the other.

But, look: here’s a reader who’s not at all impressed. ‘You’re quibbling about minor details‘, he or she writes. ‘The BBC’s value is that, overall, it gets things pretty much right most of the time.’

Okay then. Let us now put on our Marigolds and gingerly reach down into the sewer of BBC mendacity to see what are the first three revolting items we pull out…

Item 1:

How many UK licence-fee-payers have watched the BBC’s television news broadcasts night after night over the last six months or so — happily assuming that they must be getting at least a tolerably accurate picture of the world as it affects and is affected by the UK…?

— For, in all that time, they have never been told that their nation is currently fighting at least seven covert wars in the Middle East and North Africa, outside of any democratic oversight or control (Article by Mark Curtis here.)

Item 2:

How many UK licence-fee-payers yesterday listened to a succession of BBC radio news broadcasts — happily assuming that they must be getting at least a reasonably complete description of the computer ‘ransomware’ attack that has affected many thousands of NHS computers…?

— For in none of those reports did they hear discussion of how the malware responsible originated as US government spy and hijack technology secretly developed by the NSA — nor any mention of the fact that the only reason the NHS’s old and unsupported ‘Windows XP’ machines are so vulnerable is that as Home Secretary, Theresa May spent six years (2010-2016) not disbursing the insignificant sums of money that would have kept them secure. (Article by Craig Murray here.)

And if you know how to read for what isn’t there, as well as what is, you can see that the BBC knows these things perfectly well — but won’t allow them to be discussed out in the open.

I’m not kidding: take a look at how this online BBC news item simply cannot bring itself to say out loud that ‘Eternalblue’ — the vulnerability-exploiting software at the heart of the ‘WannaCrypt’ worm — is an actual US NSA creation

That’s a state-serving propaganda mechanism in action, folks! (And the state being served isn’t even the UK…!)

To see such pitiful weaselry in the smugly self-vaunting output of our puffed-up national broadcaster is almost funny — albeit that stuff like this goes out every minute of every day. But anyone who isn’t sickened by it at the same time should remember that, had it been, say, the Russians who had first developed and then lost control of this malware, the responsibility for its creation, for its loss, and for the damage it has done would have been at the top of the BBC news agenda for days — and it wouldn’t have been dressed up as ‘stolen tools’, either…

Item 3:

How many UK licence-fee-payers have been reading the BBC’s website and social media reports about the UK’s current election campaign — happily assuming that they can trust all those indications that Theresa May’s polling and public appearances show her ‘going down a storm’, whereas Jeremy Corbyn’s show him to be going down the tubes…?

— For, in spite of everything that the BBC is attempting to do to create and spread that impression, the contradictory reality just keeps leaking out…

Here — from two separate BBC news items — is ‘Theresa May’s campaign — the BBC image‘…

And here is ‘Theresa May’s campaign — the reality‘…

Meanwhile, here — from a BBC TV News report — is ‘Jeremy Corbyn’s Campaign — the BBC image‘…

And here is ‘Jeremy Corbyn’s campaign — the reality‘…

In fact, if you’re interested, I can even offer you a clever composite picture showing just how extreme were the photographic contortions the BBC lie-machine had to put itself through in order to arrive at that first Corbyn image…

Yes, I know: we’ve all seen them do it before…

And as far as that Laura Kuenssberg — ‘BBC Political Editor’ since 2015 — is concerned, it might be as well to point out that, just a few months ago, she was seen to have been in breach of rules concerning accuracy and impartiality in connection with an interview she conducted with that same Jeremy Corbyn. As was revealed by the Editorial Standards Committee of the oxymoronic ‘BBC Trust’, Corbyn’s entirely reasonable and concise answer to a highly specific question was, in the eventual news broadcast itself, presented as a distinctly less impressive answer to a question that he had not, in fact, been asked.

Here’s an extract from the write up in the Scottish Sunday Herald. (The heading in red type is, of course, mine — and, for what it’s worth, my question stands…)

Now, you will of course be wondering how it was that the BBC handled this embarrassing issue — just as I, of course, went and made it my business to go and find out.

And here is what I found.

Yes, forced to admit that the ‘BBC Political Editor’ had done something that its audience would certainly regard as thoroughly disreputable — if not, indeed, an obvious sacking offence — the Corporation’s news team hid the announcement as best they could … by putting it on their website’s ‘Entertainment and Arts‘ page…


All of which display of scrupulous honesty and the highest journalistic standards brings me back to our old friend Nick Robinson.

Here are two clips from the time of 2014’s ‘Indyref’ — Scotland’s vote on possible independence, and an issue that could not have driven the UK’s state broadcaster to a more obvious or extreme display of bias in service of the status quo.

First, an important clip that presents a slice of unedited ‘actuality’ from a press conference given by veteran Scots nationalist Alex Salmond MSP…

And, secondly, here is a clip that presents what was seen and heard on the BBC news, courtesy of Mr Robinson…

No, I’m not telling you what to think about that. You can decide for yourselves.

I have other things to talk about. Plus, I have a good friend who is a solicitor.

However, just as happened last night, watching Tory Boy in action has left me too disgusted to continue.

Let me come back tomorrow — when I’ll go through the rest of the ‘negative’ postbag.

In the meantime, don’t have nightmares. Remember: all you have to do to make the BBC go away forever is … stop paying for it

MD

microdonateIf you’ve enjoyed reading this or another posting, please consider making an anonymised micro-donation in return! Micro-donation — 50p, 50c, whatever — is the way to sponsor the creation of quality content outside the control of corporate-owned and power-serving media structures. To micro-donate to me, with guaranteed anonymity, simply click on the button… Thanks!

Advertisements

22 thoughts on “‘Tory! Tory! Tory!’ (3)

  1. What happened to the fierce searching for the truth which built the reputation of the BBC as the beacon of honesty and truth in the eyes of the world? Maybe it is just the current crop of a Tory supporting political journalists who have hijacked political news reporting or is it that the independence of the corporation has been compromised by the influence of the media billionaire oligarchy.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. I agree, the level of bias is vile. It makes listening to the BBC a trial of one’s patience. The floating voter is being short-changed- the media lurches ever further towards the Righties as the new norm. The gutter press chortle over Corbyn ‘running over a camera-man’- when it was actually a police driver who was doing the driving, and Nick Robinson kept chuckling over this and a Union leader falling down some stairs, as if either is amusing. He failed to keep the contempt out of his voice.
    The BBC are running a -[sometimes]subtle campaign undermining ALL the opposition leaders. But it also undermines the BBC’s right to ask the public to subsidise them as a public service broadcaster. They should get the Conservative party to fund them, now that they are just a propoganda arm of the Tory party.
    I really miss the BBC- what has taken over is sloppy, partisan and dumbed-down.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. I have started to hate BBC political reporters because most of them cannot hide their bias but it is written all over their faces and penetrating their voices. Just like the face and voice of the prime minister. On the other hand, Jeremy Corbyn looks natural and friendly to everyone. He is loveable.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Two points:
    (1) we continue to pay the BBC licence fee because it is unlawful not to do so if any of us wish to watch ANYTHING on our TV sets or on-line on our computers. We have no choice in the matter.
    (2) The BBC was correct in placing their report about Frau von Kuenssberg “inaccuracy” in her broadcast “interview” with Jeremy Corbyn on their Arts & Entertainment web page because the BBC today is completely in the entertainment industry and treats its “news” output as such.
    In particular, their various – and varying – employed media “celebrities” [who have never done anything to celebrate] are interested in one thing and one thing only: themselves. They perceive of themselves as “brands” and employ booking agents to secure them lucrative appearance fees, book deals, etc.
    The day the news died [to use a non-musical analogy] was when the BBC retreated over the dodgy Iraq dossier and when they failed to pursue the truth behind the mysterious death of Dr David Kelly.
    If people really want to know the truth, then it is sites like this one and offGuardian who tell it.

    Liked by 2 people

    • For your first point: no, it is not illegal to stop paying the BBC. The BBC would love you to think that, and their adverts/letters/threats try hard to make it sound like that, but the fact is that they would have to prove, beyond doubt, that you are watching live TV on your TV or computer, or are using BBC iPlayer, in order to have any legal rights at all. They cannot enter your home, they cannot bully you or take you to court, or send bailiffs/police around without a court order *which they cannot get without prior evidence* – in other words, you would have to tell them that you are watching live TV, or log on BBC iPlayer services, before they can take any action at all.

      If you use the other channels’ online services, you don’t need a licence at all. The licence ONLY covers live TV (whether you watch or record), or BBC iPlayer – you are free to use any other streaming or proxy recording system without a licence.

      Like

  5. I listened to a Radio 4 interview with Boris Johnson the other morning where all he wanted to do was slate JC. I was quite pleased that the interviewer did manage for the the most part to put him back on topic but at the end Boris had a final dig at JC by repeating the misrepresented answer regarding a shoot-to-kill policy. I thought after the findings of the BBC Editorial Standards Committee had only just surfaced that Boris would have been corrected but no. To make matters worse the interviewer then announced that Laura Kuenssberg was with him in the studio so asked her opinion, a great opportunity to firstly correct Boris but not even a hint.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. As we always say at 6 .00 every night lets watch the party political broadcast on behalf of the Tory party oh sorry we got it wrong we mean t the BBC news

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I have always respected the BBC,but now I will not watch it.It isn’t until these things are pointed out, that we realise we are being hoodwinked. Even then I don’t just listen to other people’s opinion, I scrutinise every word.Laura Kuenssberg is particularly biased against Jeremy Corbyn,its so obvious to everyone,unless you are a Tory!something else I’ve noticed about a lot of the BBC’S reporters, is the way they report, its very dogmatic,in your face almost,almost like being preached at.we should be given the FACTS and then we can make up our own mind.By the way,I haven’t voted labour for quite a few years,so I’m not sticking up for labour,but I am sticking up for the truth.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Item 1 – covert wars: FFS did they just start this week? So how are they news this week?
    Item 2 – here’s BBC WannaCry online coverage acknowledging CIA /NSA involvement
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39915440
    Item 3 – here’s a BBC story explicitly saying Corbyn drew a big crowd
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-39658237
    Oh, and by cherry picking photos you can always find a close crop of one person and a wide shot of another. Do you vote according to the size if crowd you see in photos?

    Here’s a blog entirely devoted to accusing the BBC of Left wing bias.
    https://biasedbbc.org

    Your own journalistic standards are remarkably shoddy for one so self-importantly judgemental…

    Like

  9. @robharrydeanFawcett : I’m not saying you’re 100% wrong here but I think the pictures are what many people zipping through stories look at and the ones they show on the Corbyn crowds are still not really representative and he didn’t draw hundreds, you can probably count a thousand in the pictures presented here and from what I’ve seen in other photos it was easily thousands.
    The Alex Salmond thing is both heinous and indisputable as far as I can see.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s