First former MEP Edward McMillan-Scott tweeted, "So far the BBC has not reported this important breaking story (which is on multiple sources) on its once mighty “News & Current Affairs” output". Then former spin doctor Alastair Campbell joined in: "Why not BBC News ? Because if it’s bad for Brexit it ain’t on the Beeb".
Now it has to be said that comments could be going a lot better for Alastair:
- Is it not the story that's on their front page? Looks like it to me.
- Headlining on BBC Radio 4 news...worth checking perhaps before tweeting?
- Second story on both 5 Live and BBC Breakfast after Trump meltdown. Which seems fair. Sometimes, if you squint enough, people can contort the facts to fit their view.
- As long as you ignore, for example, the front page of its website.
- Not disagreeing with the generalisation but in this case its the second story on the web after Trump/G7.
So it actually looks as if "if it's bad for Brexit it is on the Beeb".
And talking of things that are on the Beeb...
Here's BBC editor Rob Burley rubbing a little more salt into Alastair Campbell's wounds:
And talking of things that are on the Beeb...
Here's BBC editor Rob Burley rubbing a little more salt into Alastair Campbell's wounds:
He's also saying that Alastair is spreading "fake news". (Who, Alastair Campbell? Surely not!).
As Rob says, the BBC is certainly not burying this story:
But on it goes:
A not too subtle way of amplifying the story via social media? He was Labour's press guy after all.
ReplyDeleteI heard the story being trumpeted on BBC World Service (odd, given it's such a parochial story really). The gist seemed to be that the Russian Ambassador instructed AB as follows: "Mr Banks here are 300 gold roubles. You will take these to agent Cobra, who you may know better as Nigel Farage, and ask him to buy influence for the Leave campaign among your corrupt western officials. In return for payment they will stuff the ballot boxes with leave votes. Is that clear, Comrade?" At least I think that's what they said.
Easy pickings for Burley to show them up as barking when they show themselves to be barking! As if the BBC hasn't been highlighting leading EU fanatics Blair, Campbell, Miliband D, Adonis et al who are here to tell us what we should think and do because they will it. And in the Campbell barking world, it's pro Brexit bias even if (especially if!) there are no Brexiters on the programme.
ReplyDeleteHas anyone noticed the latest to appear from the undergrowth in the company of the barking? Will Hutton. Who he? The BBC hasn't kept his seat warm in the way they have over the years for Miliband D. But he's popped up in the Evening Standard spraying strawmen like confetti and promoting a book with Adonis, with the - ahem - modest title Saving Britain. https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/boris-johnson-s-big-tirade-says-it-all-about-the-folly-of-brexit-a3858576.html
Once upon a time on BBBC there were a few BBC staff who 'engaged'. There was one who claimed affiliation, and of course the good Doctor.
DeleteWhilst something is better than nothing, I was never too impressed, as they engaged only with what they felt they could win, and if confronted with an actual spiralling path, usually bailed, or flounced, before things got awkward back at the ranch.
Some felt their contributions were invaluable, and advocated cutting them a lot of slack. This seemed counter productive. Being granted an uncritical audience has poor historical precedent.
And so it is with Hurly Burley. Clearly a bright chap, and 'going places', I have noticed his engagements also are, at best, 'selective'. He chooses a loon, shoots them down, and then basks in the applause from the cheap seats. One might ask why, if the Campbells, Adoni and Owens of this world are so clearly barking, why does the BBC keep wheeling them back on? Especially when they kick off on BBC bias, often to the extent of appealing directly to Lord Hall, who seems oddly empathetic to such demands.
What Rob Burley does not do is engage with those who have his, and the BBC's measure.
Initially he used to answer me on twitter. No longer. I was only reminded of him today when Chis mason got sniffy about a fact I provided, huffed and puffed about BBC 'facts', and then settled on huff and went dark. Ron faithfully RT'd all Chis' efforts. None of mine. I also did not notice much applause even from said cheap seats.
I have a hashtag, #montoyamoment , for when someone tweets something they clearly think is on OMG-Boom (to use a Katty-call), but outside the resonance chamber of their bubble may play differently.
A bunch of vocal remainers shrieking about Russians on twitter may be loud, but without actual substantiation it is, again, a hollow jar. So why the BBC should so proudly again defer to these folk to buy them off, and brag about it seems... entirely typical.