Thursday 28 September 2017

Extremely random thoughts

It's actually sounds like quite an interesting speech. (Other takes can be found here and here).

Of course, Nick thinks the BBC is pretty much getting it about right and that the BBC is much 'greater' and much more 'super' (one for Reggie Perrin fans) than mean, dodgy old social media, but he also cites an old Steve Hewlett programme on Channel 4 that deliberately set out to shine the spotlight on voices that go against the liberal consensus and suggests that the BBC might pursue that route. It sounded excellent.

A much greater plurality of voices is certainly desperately needed on the BBC. 

Naturally Nick doesn't point out that it is entirely typical that it was Channel 4 rather than the BBC which broadcast such a consensus-defying programme and that the BBC has (or had) no such equivalent programme to boast of, though I suspect he must have thought it as that was my first thought on reading that bit of his speech. 


BBC staff on Twitter (reporters, editors, presenters among them) have been in full tally-ho mode today against leading alt-left sites like The Canary and Evolve Politics after the former posted a falsehood about Tory Laura Kuenssberg. 

The Canary claimed she'd agreed to make a speech at the Tory Scum party conference. 

In fact Laura K had refused the invitation to make a speech (at a centre-right think tank fringe event). 

The alt-left, being caught red-handed, then rammed the brakes on but ended up skidding all over the place because they couldn't quite bring themselves to lose face by conceding that they'd cocked up, even though it was clear from their tweets that they knew they had cocked up. They wormed and wriggled and weaselled - as (alas) we bloggers too often do when we're caught out. 

I say 'we' but I'd like to think that whenever your actual we (meaning 'us' - me and Sue) get it wrong (as occasionally happens) we at least have the decency to admit it. 


Godwin's Law only embraces mentioning the Nazis, doesn't it? It doesn't mean that bloggers aren't allowed to make comparisons to Weimar Germany, does it?

Reading my Twitter feed over the last couple of days has made me think that there are elements in the Labour Party that would be better suited to Weimar Germany. 

As Sue wrote, why aren't the BBC going crazy about this?

For years-gone-by (at least until the party collapsed) every fruitcake utterance by even the most obscure UKIP councillor would receive bags of unfavourable coverage from the BBC but today's Labour's fruitcakes are vastly more numerous, much much fruit(cake)ier and far, far, far nastier. They are coming out with outrages almost by the hour, and yet the BBC isn't splashing their every foul utterance or misdemeanour - or any of them really. 

Why not?


The BBC certainly keeps them coming. 

Within the past couple of days alone we've had The Muslim cosplayer who uses the hijab in her outfits and Muslim woman 'touched' by anonymous gift (the gift was of 25 hijab-wearing dolls). The BBC also promoted the first of those stories on Twitter:
Oddly (as a Google search shows) there have been no such good-news stories about sari-wearing women from the BBC. 

Is the BBC guilty of hijabaphilia? (Answer: Yes). 


Via Mice Height at Biased-BBC you can watch a fascinating interview between the famous Milo Yiannopoulos and BBC Trending guru Mike Wendling. 

At the beginning of the YouTube video Mike states that his interview with Milo will form part of a Radio 4 'special'. He wasn't any more specific than that but I'm guessing that it's going to be a Radio 4 'special' on the alt-right. 

Milo probably has a point that the violence of the far-Left and Muslims is seriously underplayed by people like BBC journalists while the much smaller threat posed by the far-Right is vastly overplayed - and, to be fair, Mike didn't exactly give Milo grounds for disbelieving that with his questions.

It will be interesting to hear that Radio 4 'special' and compare it to this YouTube interview posted (and, presumably, filmed) by Milo and his friends. 

Incidentally, Mike has a new book out in April 2018 called Alt-Right: From 4chan to the White House. Hopefully, a sequel called Alt-Left: From The Canary to BBC Trending will be out in April 2019.


On tonight's BBC One News at Six George Aligiah posed the following question to a BBC reporter:  
Some people are going to say that the very fact Theresa May is defending the free market suggests Jeremy Corbyn has hit the spot?
The "Some people are going to say" is classic BBC of course, and it's a canny way of putting it. Call it 'degrees of separation' if you will. 

Some people doubtless will be saying that very thing (especially Corbynistas). 

George's question is an interesting choice of question though, isn't it? What do you make of it?


Here's one for The Canary crowd. The last chairpersonage of the BBC Trust Rona Fairhead has been given a peerage and made a minister in the present Conservative government.


Meanwhile for those getting ahead of themselves on Upstart Crow on the BBC iPlayer, there are some excellent jokes at the expense of Benedict Cumberbatch on the final episode of this excellent BBC comedy. (Their only decent BBC sitcom of recent years?)


  1. I just posted my thoughts on Nick Robinson's "telling off" on the Open Thread. Suffice to say, I think it was almost a model exercise in BBC Fake Newsing.

    Why don't the BBC pursue Labour Lunatics? Indeed. I pointed out on another thread how lacklustre was the support in the hall at Conference when Corbyn reached a
    crescendo and called for a "genuine two state solution" as opposed to when he laid into the Israeli "oppression". The majority of Labour delegates clearly want Israel wiped from the map. Of that I have no doubt. But the MSM won't expose that.

    Ah yes George Aligiah...I well remember his impartial speech calling for unrestricted immigration into the UK. Has he changed his view?

  2. I thought at the time 'hang on George - that's stretching credulity a bit'. He normally sends me to sleep but I woke up at that little gem!

    There's clearly a bit more to dull old George than his apparently overt niceness would suggest!

    One to watch I think.

    1. There's a lot more! I remember his face lighting up as he reported that the Meriden gypsies had re-occupied the land from which they'd just been evicted - scratch the surface & there's a left-wing sympathiser underneath. But of how many BBC journalists is that NOT true?

  3. Here's Aligiah giving his extreme views on migration - supporting abandonment of all effective migration controls because migration is inevitable and always positive in its impact:

    I doubt an article like that could appear now...the BBC realise they have a fight on their hands over migration and would be much more circumspect and underhand, rather than allowing George to say in effect "you are a prejudiced bigot if you don't allow anyone who wants to come here entry to the UK".

  4. Nick actually seems to believe he and all his colleagues are messengers of the only true path. I suppose he deserves a certain credit for at least engaging rather than the various favoured suppression techniques, but template fits of the vapours really don't cut it in face of actual facts.

    Has he challenged Welby to a duel yet?

    Cassocks at dawn?

    1. "It's 7am and here are the BBC Narratives" should be the lead in on Today.

  5. re Kuenssberg:

    It is incorrect to say that The Canary claimed she had agreed to make the speech. The article said throughout that she was invited.

    She was listed as a speaker on the Eventbrite site.

    She was listed as as a speaker on the conference website with the word (invited) after it.

    The Canary always said she was listed as invited.

    Her name was then removed from both lists after this was publicly ventilated along with a denial she was speaking.

    The fact she was listed as invited has been screenshotted and is verifiably true.

    Here is what the article said: “BBC Political Editor Laura Kuenssberg is listed as an ‘invited speaker’ at the Conservative Party conference. And the news raises questions about the impartiality of the journalist and her organisation. Again”

    What exactly is the issue?


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