Saturday, 5 November 2016

Kirsty walks over her pro-Brexit guests

Kirsty Wark attempted a bit of 'BBC impartiality' on last night's Newsnight:
What does the depiction of the three judges on the front of the Daily Mail today tell us about our divided nation? If you saw the description of the three senior judges as 'the enemy of the people' [sic] and thought, yes, those men should [sic - she meant "shouldn't"] be allowed to frustrate the referendum verdict then you are probably on one side of this debate. If you thought it was a slur against our independent judiciary then you're probably on the other.
Given that she herself had twice harrumphed about that Daily Mail headline on the previous night's Newsnight and then went on last night to further harrumph about it in her interview with Stephen Glover of the Daily Mail and Labour's Stella Creasy, always putting her 'impartial' points from the "it was a slur against our independent judiciary" standpoint, I'd said she clearly placed herself "on one side of the debate" too.

Not that there's been much doubt where Kirsty stood during most of her interviews in the past two days. Her pro-Leave guests all got talked over and challenged much more than her pro-Remain guests. 

If you want a blatant example of that bias just try Thursday night's joint interview between (pro-Leave) Tory backbencher Kwasi Kwarteng and (pro-Remain) Labour frontbencher Emily Thornberry. Kirsty relentlessly interrupted and challenged Mr Kwarteng but left Ms Thornberry pretty much alone. As an example of 'biased interviewing' this was an absolute classic.

As was the Stephen Glover-Stella Creasy interview. It was the man from the Mail who got the hard time while her political guest, Ms Creasy, got an easy ride. (In fact, it often felt like a tag-team attack by Kirsty and Stella Creasy on the mild-mannered Mr Glover). 

Even the (pro-Remain) Dominic Grieve v (pro-Leave) Suzanne Evans interview saw Mr Grieve getting far more time than Suzanne Evans and being allowed to finish his points while Ms Evans got barely a word in and yet still got talked over. 

In fairness to Kirsty Wark though, Evan Davis has become just as bad this year. And as for James O'Brien...!


  1. Divided Nation? It's the BBC who are driving the divisive agenda with their unrelenting efforts to scupper Brexit - against the wishes of the majority of UK voters.

  2. It's victimhood polictics it divides everyone into groups and makes things worse rather than better. Black, Muslim, Gay, transgender I find it very annoying as someone who just treats everyone the same way "if you're a twat I'll treat you like a twat" I don't see why we have to divide and subdivide it's serves no useful purpose.

  3. The bbc are stirring the pot and making the whole process difficult to suit there own selfish interests. We are truly in troubling times where the bbc and there cronies think they can manipulate everything to suit there interests. Not to mention the MPs whos are elected to put through the interats of the people but continue to ignore that and follow there own selfish agendas. Drastic change is needed in this country quickly and heads need to roll to get the people who are responsible for enforcing the pubics decisions on track or they should lose there right to be involved in the process. If a doctor gave out medication that wouldn't help but because they liked the look of the packaging or because they would be better of they would be banned and publicly shamed. Unacceptable