Anti-Brexit/Anti-Boris academic Imke Henkel of the University of Lincoln tweeted the following a few hours ago:
Just a reminder - after threats this morning were repeated by members of incoming government party to scrap the license fee - because they didn't like how the BBC reported the election campaign. Will this government attack media freedom?
Guess who replied to that? Yes, the BBC's John Simpson:
I suspect Channel 4 and the BBC will now be in for a very tough time.
And he's continued this evening by demonstrating the very kind of flawed impartiality that's got Channel 4 and the BBC into such hot water this election:
In 1979, as she entered No 10, Mrs Thatcher prayed that she would bring harmony. In 2019 Johnson says he wants to be PM of all the people. The difference between them? Mrs T had a burning ideology; BJ has a burning ambition.
Bitter, John?
I'm not surprised they're looking over their shoulders.The BBC are bad but did anybody watch the travesty that was Channel 4's election coverage. What an absolute shower!!
ReplyDeleteAnd we are funding that crap!
ReplyDeleteAs the BBC remains an incorrigible lefty political organisation with free rein to do pretty much what it likes in propaganda, the only realistic solution is to take half the money we pay it and give it to a new incorrigible righty organisation to pump out a rival brand of political agenda and propaganda. Balance, BBC!
ReplyDeleteNo, they shouldn’t get money from a tax. Any funding needs to be optional so you can choose to pay and view or opt out.
DeleteIf you deprive the BBC of funding but allow it to continue it will attract support from PC billionaires. It will certainly attract subscribers so top up funding from people like Soros would be a definitely possibility.
DeleteI predict Boris Derangement Syndrome coming to a BBC screen near you for at least the next 5 years.
ReplyDeleteDon't forget Sky and ITV as well! :)
DeleteHaving missed out on some of the fun by having to go to bed and then to work, I'm catching up tonight, picking up from where I left off last night on the election thread and (at 2.46 am) a classic bit of BBC bluffing from Jeremy Vine. He was talking about the constituency next door to me:
ReplyDelete"Lancaster & Fleetwood, by the way, we have as the Conservatives not taking. That's a 6,500 majority. Normally, they wouldn't have a prayer there."
Lancaster did stay with arch-Corbynista Cat Smith, who took the seat in 2015, and her vote fell by over 4,000, but Lancaster is most definitely not a seat where the Conservatives "normally wouldn't have a prayer". 2017 was an exceptional year. The Conservatives held Lancaster from 2005-2015, and except for the early Blair years, Lancaster had been Conservative for most of the post-war period. Indeed, Cat Smith only just won in 2015 and her majority in 2017 was a blip. This election gave her another marginal victory (especially if you add the Brexit Party vote share to the Conservatives' vote share). The Conservatives have always had a prayer there, and more often than not over the years, that prayer has been answered by the voters of Lancaster.
So, Jeremy Vine was talking rubbish there.
Just proves that: "The more you know about a subject the more you know the media are talking bollocks about that subject."
Delete