Sunday, 21 May 2017

"One cynic told me expectations are so low if Corbyn turns up and doesn't soil himself it's a success"

Now, it's only right after the previous post to note that Mark Mardell has been getting 'complaints from both sides' today. 

His report on TWTW about Seumas Milne, Jeremy Corbyn's main spokesman, might strike some as perfectly balanced, or others as sympathetic to Mr Milne, or others still as hostile to Mr Milne. (Though a range of voices was provided - all from the Left, of course - given that the most regular charges against Seumas Milne that I've read are that he's a Stalinist with a long history of very extreme comments and that none of that side of his past was explored, simply dismissed in passing, I'd say it tilted towards the sympathetic side. Still, there were plenty of supporters of Seumas and plenty of critics - and plenty of supporters of Jeremy Corbyn and plenty of critics.)

None of that was exactly the thing which caused the Corbynistas to cry 'Havoc' and let slip the dogs of war on Mark Mardell today. No, the casus belli was a very brief, passing anecdote: 
One cynic told me expectations are so low if Corbyn turns up and doesn't soil himself it's a success, but activists do feel vindicated pointing to a smooth manifesto launch and a recent rise in the opinion polls. 

Of course, Mark Mardell was just passing on some anonymous comment from a Labour 'cynic', but these Twitter critics are blaming him for making the remarks. 

'Complaints from both sides' indeed. But my post has a lot of compelling evidence, hopefully, while these criticisms seem to be based on a misunderstanding of who said what and what reporting involves.

My 'complaint' is, therefore, better than their 'complaints' and the 'complaints from both sides' defence, yet again, crumbles into the sorry remnants of an apple crumble after all the apple has been eaten and there are only a few crumbs of crumble left.

So there!


  1. And this is why the Complaints From Both Sides defense is BS.

    1. Exactly.

      Add that to the 'there aren't just two sides and the BBC is capable of being biased against several sides' point, and the defence deserves never to be trotted out again.

  2. We all know the BBC have an agreed policy position which is essentially what I call Soggy Left (pro globalist, pro no borders, pro multi culturalism, pro mass immigration, pro extreme feminism, pro social liberalism in all its forms and pro welfarism (don't think they are serious about wealth distribution though). Their ideal political leader would probably be a fusion of Chuka Umuna and Yvette Cooper.

    The Soggy Left hate everything to the left and the right of them so they work to undermine the Conservative Party and of course UKIP, but also the Corbynista wing of leftism.