Sunday 22 March 2015

As I am subtle, false and treacherous as the BBC...

Richard III, acting the part of Laurence Olivier

The BBC News Channel is devoting a lot of time this afternoon to the slightly-belated funeral procession of Yorkist king Richard III. 

It's all a little bit surreal.

As a Lancastrian, I'm appalled. 

The bias is astonishing. That comely wench Martine Croxall is actually wearing a Yorkist white rose in a truly outrageous display of BBC bias. 

She's also quoting the Richard III Society - as if they're as worthy of the BBC's respect as, say, CAGE or the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. 

Never mind the BBC being the broadcast wing of the Guardian, the corporation has now become the broadcast wing of the Richard III Society. I will be writing to Andrew Bridgen MP.

And, come to think of it, she even failed to label the Richard III Society as a "pressure group". 

And now she's parroting their pro-Yorkist propaganda, saying that all the bad stuff we think we know about him is merely "according to the (Tories) Tudors": "The Tudors insist that Richard murdered the two princes in the tower, but most experts reject this, saying that the evidence points more towards the involvement of Mossad. Reporting from Gloucester, here's our Middle Ages editor, Jeremy Bowen"...

Plus, she says, "many" historians feel he has great achievements to his name. He opposed the bedroom tax for starters and laid the groundwork for instituting the BBC licence fee.

Today, in the "diverse" city of Leicester [as the BBC put it earlier today], Richard III (pbuh) is being buried. The hideously white crowd is applauding. Ring out the bells! My hearse, my hearse, my kingdom for a hearse! 

Like Richard himself, I've got a hunch...that the BBC is enjoying this. And why not?


  1. LOL (as my students would say...)

    1. Hi Sue, lovely to hear from you again.

  2. That was hilarious.
    Christopher Scopes

  3. This is hilarious: and I am speaking as a Historian. Its also slightly disconcerting, since there are literally Ricardians who think like this. I've encountered some who seriously claim that Richard invented Legal Aid, Presumption of Innocence, and insist he was absolutely the best King he ever had.

    I'm afraid I'm guilty of mocking them, when I suggest they will soon be arguing he also penned the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights and discovered gravity.
    There's precious little evidence he invented either of the above, by the way. In fact, the sources suggest both had already existed in some form for centuries.

    Some claim that he never did anything wrong except lopping off the head of his brother in law, Lord Hastings- and since he was REALLY sorry about that afterwards, he should be forgiven.

    Honestly, I know historians who used to be affiliated with the Richard III society. At one point it was a reputable Historical Organization, but under the likes of Philippa Langley, it members now resemble a religious cult.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.