“The utter junk that is GB News”

I'm not sensing much love in the responses here:

Colin Brazier, GB News: Today: a 'helicopter day'; when Sky & BBC put up the chopper to follow cavalcades and lend announcements at No10 a lofty dignity. But aerial shots don't reflect what broadcasters often neglect on the ground. The millions who feel a debt of loyalty for the Brexit Boris gave them.

Adam Boulton, ex-Sky: That's because we report the news rather than spout partisan fake news.

Rob Burley, ex-BBC, now LBC: Good on Adam calling out the utter junk that is GB News.

The Case of the Deleted Tweet

 

A Twitter mystery. 

Earlier today Emily Maitlis posted a tweet about crowds at a London airport with a cryptic remark that I can't quite remember. I thought on seeing it, 'What's she getting at there?'. I assumed she be 'getting at' something, sending out dog whistles of some kind to her followers to condemn someone or something, but I moved on and postponed thinking about it again till later. 

And now that tweet has vanished. 

Enjoying a bit of detective work I've tried tracking the replies.

One demanded "context", saying the crowds were probably socially distanced and complaining that "a once world-leading Broadcaster, setting the standards for others" has sunk to "now following the clicks".

Another wrote (after the deletion), "I’m a little concerned why you have deleted your earlier tweet featuring a photo of a busy Heathrow Airport terminal? Was it inaccurate? At times like these we need to rely on a vigilant and accurate media, if we don’t have this then what do we actually have?". 

Another wrote (before the deletion), "You do realise a lot of these people would have been sitting in close proximity to each other on their flights. The question should be why are so many people flying at all? Did you need to go to the States? Couldn’t you have done the job from the studio?"

That was a theme others took up: "That's the price you pay for your two week jolly in the States, paid for by licence payers."

Someone else accused her of "stirring": "You know that everyone now flying has had the 72 hour Covid test prior to flying in which case you know these people are  Covid free! Stop stirring - again."

A clue as to what Emily Maitlis might have been 'getting at' came with this reply: "The negative effects of Brexit are already being felt as British passport holders wait in constricted airport lobby with no social distancing."

*******

And having just written all this, I see that some fine soul screengrabbed the vanished tweet:

What point do you think Emily Maitlis was trying to make? And why did she delete her tweet (without comment) after an hour or two of replies?

*******

Whatever, it highlights again the dangers of social media overactivity by BBC presenters, for themselves and for the BBC as a whole. It keeps getting them into trouble.

Plus, that "following the clicks" charge against the BBC is demonstrated by this very tweet. It was just sent out, without context, begging for clicks.

And another good question was raised in those replies: Why does Emily Maitlis keep flitting backwards and forwards between the UK and the US during a pandemic rather than leave it to the US's many US-based journalists (e.g. Jon Sopel and Anthony Zurcher)? Is such travel necessary?

*******

Evening Update: Well, well, well...

Sky News is tweeting tonight about Sky's editor-at-large (must resist cruel puns!) Adam Boulton. 

Adam's not happy:

"This is welcome to Britain... not ideal." Sky's editor-at-large @adamboultonSKY was in a queue for one hour and 20 minutes at Heathrow, returning from the United States. The airport has said a two-metre rule inside has never been feasible.

It doesn't reflect well on Adam Boulton or Sky that they clearly failed to guess how most people would (very naturally) react to that 'entitled' tweet. 

They are now, of course, getting an absolute pasting for it.

Here's a small but representative selection:  

• My heart bleeds for him. I’m sure the trip to the US was really essential too.
• I noticed Sky, BBC, Ch4 etc. all sent multiple presenters and crew members to the US this past week. Could that not be covered by people already on site or remotely? It’s no use lambasting people who are struggling to put food on the table. Expecting them to step aside for you.
• And to be fair no news reporters need to travel. Just use colleagues in the relevant countries.
• We're in the middle of a global pandemic where most of us are stuck in our houses, so my cup of sympathy about his airport woes is, quite frankly, empty.
• What was so important that he had to travel? Not heard of video calling? Instead just adds to the problem. Well done!

Many have been far less charitable.

Looking at this, Emily Maitlis now seems almost sensible for deleting her tweet. Adam Boulton and the crowd at Sky appear utterly clueless in comparison. (Kay and Beth might have a chuckle at this, if no one else).

Paper bag for Adam, please

Sky's Adam Boulton is hyperventilating on our behalf in The Sunday Times today. 

Number 10 is trying to control the media, and everyone in our democracy out to be afraid gasps the headline. 

The piece then launches into a wheezy defence of the MSM, which he fears is being dangerously "downgraded". 

He partly blames the BBC for bringing this situation about, accusing the corporation of having "connived for their own selfish advantage" with this process of degradation. 

He's not wrong about the BBC's imperial swagger and occasional bloodlust towards its media rivals, but the example he gives of the BBC letting the side down is the corporation's refusal to play ball with its fellow broadcasters during the election by preferring their "shouty" Question Time format for election debates. 

Hmm, weren't those BBC debates (such as the Johnson/Corbyn one hosted by Nick Robinson) actually the best ones?

The BBC's in charge

Emily tries to take back control 

Here's Sky's Adam Boulton on that Rob Burley-edited BBC Conservative leadership debate:

As it has demonstrated since 2010, the BBC isn't really comfortable losing control to debates in which the exchanges between the candidates are all that matters. The corporation has an institutional bias towards making programmes which its off-screen producers and editors can shape. So, for example, it shoves its presenters on stage, giving them equal or better prominence than the debaters. 

Further the BBC likes "to paint the lily" by the intrusion of the audience and questioners. The BBC would be happy if it could reduce debates to its shouty Question Time format. A debate between political leaders is about the public - but it is about what politicians will do to the public not what a random member of the public's views are.

Two birds with one stone

During Kay Burley’s day-long vigil  (waiting to see baby Sussex.) Someone asked, “Who will the baby look like?” (smirk smirk) A potential bear-trap, that. Well, might the baby have a bit of a funny tinge? No, no, didn’t mean that; but who could forget Waynetta Slob who wanted a ‘brahn baby” like everyone else. It’s humour, not proper racism. I bet that episode has been disappeared from YouTube. 

Oh, wrong again.

You see, that’s the worst thing about Twitter. One minute you Tweet an edgy image of a chimpanzee, next minute you’re toast. 

I have to say Adam Boulton looked suitably sheepish as he reported Danny Baker’s sacking just now. 

I hate Facebook, (I think I might have mentioned that a couple of times already,) because people you used to like will keep plastering their ill-informed lefty political views all over it, typically with the arrogant, presumptuous, righteous certainty that everyone agrees with them. (Okay, too many adjectives.)

With Twitter, it’s a different story. I don’t - partly because I’d get myself into hot water as soon as I dipped my toe in, trying to be too clever by half, like Adam Boulton. His own Twitter blooper became as conspicuous as a very large elephant as he feigned disinterest while reporting Danny Baker-gate on Sky News. 

Jewish News explains:

“Breakfast Show presenter Julia Hartley-Brewer immediately expressed her concern, writing: “What does that mean? 

“Are you saying that Jews visiting London shouldn’t expect to walk around in an area heavily populated by Muslims and not be spat at? I hope not.” 

In response, Boulton wrote: “No. @MrHarryCole asked what is happening to our country.  

“I was gently suggesting that the offending individuals may not be from here and that it is not a typical area.” 

To which, Hartley-Brewer replied: “Ah, ok. Fair enough. But while they may not have been born here, many of those people will live here.” 

Following further criticism, Boulton tweeted: “You enjoy your outrage and distortions of what I said. I’m interested in thinking about what is happening here.” 

Sky News declined to comment.”

Well, that just goes to show what a minefield is Twitter. So, whose side are you on? Did Boulton mean: the Jew was asking for it by venturing into a notoriously Muslim area?


Or did he mean: I’m highlighting the fact that there are actual no-go areas?

This Twitterstorm in a teacup brought to mind an Edgware Road-related piece I read in 2007  “So now I am a racist Ape.” by Carol Gould. I stumbled upon her website when I first realised the computer could be used for something other than emails. Writers like Ms Gould articulated stuff that had been at the back of my mind all my life. (The rest is history.)

“Recently I went into a well-known coffee chain in Edgware Road near Marble Arch. As I waited to be served I noticed the café was crowded but that I was the only female customer. Men in various permutations of Middle Eastern garb, including several in full head-to-toe keffiyah and robe, stared at me.  

When I sat down and opened my bottle of apple juice I noticed it was fizzing. I called the server over and told her that the juice had fermented. ‘No -- English’ she said, throwing her arms up in despair. Another server came over and asked me what the problem seemed to be. I told her the juice had fermented and that they needed to check their fridge. She looked at the other woman and they shrugged.  

I have to confess I have a short fuse about non-English people populating what seems to be 99 % of every job in London and the Home Counties. I am spoilt because in recent years I have been to the USA several times and marvel at the stupendous service provided by young college students and other Americans who possess perfect English and are obliging beyond anyone’s expectations.  

So, I became exasperated and said ‘Is there no-one working here who speaks English? This is Paddington - this is still a London neighbourhood.’ 

A well-dressed man came over and said ‘I speak English.’ I thought he was going to intervene on my behalf but instead came out with this astonishing observation:
‘You are a racist! You are a racist ape! Look at you-- you are an ape!’ 

Read it all. It’s an easy read.

Edgware Road should have a warning sign; suggest “Jew-free area” and silhouette of a you-know-who with a diagonal bar across.

Adam Boulton probably won’t be sacked, but he won’t have done himself a lot of good with both antisemites and Islamophobes. Two birds with one stone, so to speak,

Liked

While Andrew's agreeing, Nick's liking...and taking Adam's side (surprise, surprise). 

If you were wondering, it all kicked off after Julia Hartley-Brewer agreed with Kate Hoey MP that broadcasters shouldn't call MPs like Jacob-Rees Mogg, Bill Cash and herself 'hardline' or 'hardliners'. Sky's Adam Boulton thinks it's fine to use such terms. 

To accompany your bacon and eggs...

Some BBC-related reading to accompany your Sunday breakfast...

First Gillian Reynolds in The Sunday Times:

It is not necessarily the best course to replace a male presenter with a female one. Sara Cox is not as good as Clive Anderson at hosting Radio 4’s Loose Ends. Talking to Cliff Richard last Saturday, her anxiety flooded the airwaves and drowned the show. 

Nor is it inevitable that one woman will do as well as another in any job. Lauren Laverne, standing in for Kirsty Young on Desert Island Discs, is a severe disappointment, all marshmallow, no nuts. The BBC, in haste to correct years of discrimination in appointments and remuneration, is doing no one any favours by preferment apparently based more on gender than on ability.

Secondly, Adam Boulton in The Sunday Times:

The BBC is world-famous for a decision-making structure of a complexity matched only by that of the Indian civil service. For a while it looked as though understandable editorial qualms might prevent a counterbid [over the Brexit Deal debate]. But [Robbie] Gibb makes no secret of his admiration for the BBC over all other broadcasters, and has close personal ties to many of his former colleagues in news and current affairs. There is a certain kind of BBC person incapable of talking about anything other than the BBC. The corporation’s eventual proposal was to May’s liking: no live audience and questions from a panel of businesspeople, who, in desperation, are inclining towards her agreement.

Thirdly, The Mail on Sunday: 

• New BBC Sounds app allowing users to listen to the radio and download shows is slammed despite £10million marketing campaign.
• Listeners flooded social media with complaints about the BBC's new service.
• One said the app was worse than the iPlayer Radio that it will replace next year.
• BBC Sounds brings 18 national and 40 local radio stations together in one app.
• A BBC spokesman said: 'BBC Sounds is already superior to the iPlayer Radio app.'

"Bye-bye, Dimbleby. Take that panto horse called Question Time with you"

BBC One's Question Time receives a full-scale hatchet job from Sky's Adam Boulton in today's Sunday Times, and David Dimbleby isn't spared either. He calls the programme a "pantomime horse" and wants it put down. It's a bracing read.

He's particularly opposed to "the bear pit element of the programme" which prioritises "heat over light" and involves "the ritual confrontation and humiliation of its guests" by a "self-selecting, juiced-up audience" - an audience that, "for all the BBC’s pretensions", is frequently "in no way 'representative' of British public opinion". He says:

Question Time is a lazy format. Its ugliness has contributed to the coarsening of public discourse.

He doesn't think the would-be ratings-grabbing "celeb add-ons" do the programme (or themselves) any favours either. 

There's a lot of truth in what Adam Boulton writes, but the BBC aren't going to drop Question Time (even though I agree they should - or at least drastically refresh its format). The BBC's "veneration" for it is too strong. With a new woman at its helm - and even the Tory culture secretary Matt Hancock is calling for David Dimbleby's replacement to be a woman-  it will doubtless sail on smugly for quite a few more years yet. 

As for David Dimbleby, the piece begins with an anecdote that's too good not to share: