Saturday 3 February 2018

Points of View

I see tonight that my and Sue's estimable former Biased BBC editor, David Vance, is giving vent today (on Twitter rather than at Biased BBC) to his anger about the BBC's treatment of Jacob Rees-Mogg:



  1. As the BBC explained it this morning, we should be worried by the "extreme views" of Mr Rees Mogg as they are provoking left-wing "moderates" into having to attack him.
    Contrast the almost joking tone of the BBC journo "reporting" on the Bristol incident, to the hushed and solemn tones of the reporting of the "far-right" attack on London mayor khan speech a few weeks back...

    1. They also used the "jokey tone" when Nigel Farage was imprisoned by a violent far left mob for several hours and prevented from campaigning. The BBC are truly disgusting.

    2. Yes, on Saturday the News Channel showed a clip from which it was unclear whether JRM was aggressor or victim - there was no explanation that the MASKED thugs had FORCED their way in or that JRM had, courageously, tried to speak to them. There then followed a report on JRM's accusations of attempts by Treasury civil servants to sabotage Brexit - meanwhile the clip of the scuffle was played in a continuous loop. Was this an oversight?

  2. Yes, I think the BBC in its present form has to be closed down...very sad to say it. But it has become an enemy of free speech, an enemy of British culture, an enemy of democracy and an enemy of the UK as a functioning entity.

    The are various ways forward. Firstly break it up.

    The website could be run by a consortia of national newspapers and news agencies.

    Local radio can be operated by local newspapers.

    National and regional radio can be hived off. Close down divisive pro-violence and pro-ethnic conflict stations like Radio 1 Extra and the Asian network.

    World Service can be separated from BBC Radio.

    The national TV service can stand alone.

    Then a 10 year programme of diversification and eventual removal of licence fee system with a residual support system.

    One option might be for various broadcasters to bid for licence fee money in the medium term and we can opt where we want our money to go.

    As the BBC are fond of saying - we need a "conversation" about where we go from here. But continuing with the current corrupt system is not an option (given it ends up with a somewhat mediocre provincial journalist like John Humphries being paid £700k).

  3. Tricky one.

    Clearly an entity with a self-promotional budget of £4,000,000,000 every year to give the masses their bread and circuses is quite the brand and political hurdle to try and tackle with fewer resources.

    On top of which, around 20,000 unemployable, overpaid, overentitled, pension protected speakers for the nation (allegedly) is an unattractive burden to impose on North London and the nicer parts of Salford.

    That all said, given the projection curve of overt damage to the country being imposed though agenda, lack of integrity, inaccuracy and unprofessionalism is almost hyperbolic now, ‘too big to fail’ has morphed into ‘too expensive to be allowed to keep on being this unique’. In particular with accountability. There is, effectively, none. Hence the topics too often discussed here, created by veterans like a Bowen or Simpson to oddly equally Teflon careerists like a Jasmine Lawrence or that young blonde lady and team giggling over their cartoon of two men they don’t like. All, not speaking for me.

    Especially as policy is now being so woefully influenced and democracy so wilfully undermined. The lack of choice the Bbc’s existence has too long imposed simply to watch tv live has now become an unacceptable influence on politics that, whilst infinitely more crucial, still at least gets to be decided upon for effectiveness, standards and value by the public being served (or not) every few years.

    So I am erring more on David’s radical surgery notion. How it is delivered, however...

  4. The fundamental problem for me is the unaccountability of the BBC to those who fund it.

    Not surprisingly this lack of accountability leads to the BBC over-paying itself, regarding itself too highly and worst of all developing it's own political voice. So it's now like being forced to pay for a political party you don't agree with at all. A dictatorship in practice.

    So to restore accountability, either:
    1. Make the license fee voluntary (take World Service make into tax-funded)
    2. Fund the BBC out of general taxation so it's then accountable to Parliament.


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