It is significant that Auntie has barely reported Smith's remarks — which are, by any standard, a major story. But timidity trumps truth.
Saturday, 19 February 2022
Andrew Neil on the BBC's reporting of the SNP
Thursday, 23 September 2021
Being kind
A tweet from Jeremy Vine today...
- Genuinely. Is there any need for such a spiteful comment?
- Anyway, sympathies today for anyone who thought Jeremy Vine was nice, whoever you are and wherever you may be.
- It's an astonishingly wrong footed comment from Vine. Perfectly sums up what's wrong with the BBC: deep-seated self regard. Andrew Neil is one of their "stars". Colin comes from a different background, family man, working class and above all *normal*.
- Classic BBC, pretends to be kind but can't help but bully anyone who is deemed beneath them. Colin Brazier is great. Calm, interesting, kind and patient with guests.
- Really? I've been watching Colin Brazier's show since he stepped in and have been massively impressed by his work.
On Monday I pointed out that Jeremy Vine is paid twice more than our PM - wages we are legally forced to pay via the BBC license fee. I think publicly-funded broadcasters need to be careful how they express personal opinions.
Update: Jeremy Vine has deleted his tweet.
Did he delete it off his own bat, or did the BBC tell him too?
Saturday, 20 February 2021
Something rotten in the state of BBC Scotland
I'd seriously urge you to read two outstanding pieces before considering Andrew Neil's questions, as they provide all the necessary background and are much more about the BBC's role in the story than you might guess merely from their headlines:
Effie Deans: It's absurd to imagine there was a conspiracy
The Scotsman: Don't blame MSPs who try to get at the Sturgeon-Salmond truth - Brian Wilson
What happened this week is that BBC Scotland interviewed one of the women who accused Alex Salmond.
This has caused some consternation, given that Mr Salmond was cleared by a jury.
And critics say that the BBC interviewer, Glenn Campbell, basically let her have a free run at Mr Salmond.
Effie Deans puts The Big Question in a nutshell: "The BBC acts as if Salmond were guilty even though he was acquitted. Why else interview someone the jury did not believe?"
She writes:
The BBC are supposed to be impartial, but it is quite clear not merely from this interview but also because of the Kirsty Wark documentary that BBC journalists have taken sides. They think that Salmond ought to have been convicted for which reason they disbelieve the alternative explanation that there was a Scottish Government conspiracy against him. This is partly because of the liberal bias in the BBC that treats all accusations of sexual assault as true, because women don’t lie, but more importantly since 2016 the BBC has lost all objectivity about Scottish politics because Sturgeon campaigned for Remain.
But there are lots of other questions for the BBC to answer, which both Effie and Brian outline and which I think will prove a lot trickier for the BBC to answer. They are nitty-gritty questions that go to the heart of BBC Scotland's actions and motivations.
These are the very ones Andrew Neil's encapsulates so well here:
- With a major h/t to Brian Wilson I put the following questions to BBC Scotland News.
- First, what was the provenance of your recent interview with one of the complainants in the Salmond affair? Did you approach the individual? Did she volunteer? Or was she offered up by the spinners surrounding the First Minister?
- Second, is she independent of the current political ructions within the SNP? If so, fine. If not, why were viewers not told. And if that was not possible on grounds of self-identification, then why was it still OK to broadcast the interview? Some disturbing things are happening in Scotland and BBC Scotland is clearly in the thick of them.
"BBC diversity of opinion in action"
If this blog becomes nothing but sponsored ads then maybe we'll need Andrew Neil to launch Andrew Neil's Is the BBC biased?
He seems to be limbering up already. This was him on Thursday:
Should the state play a bigger role post-pandemic?Good question.BBC R4 Today just devoted its prime post-0800 slot to it.Three guests - all in favour of bigger, more active government. The consensus was never challenged.BBC diversity of opinion in action.
Sunday, 24 January 2021
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye
The BBC's main defender in print, The Guardian/Observer, has a piece today that comes out very strongly against Andrew Neil & Co. and their new television service(s).
The first witness it calls in opposition to Andrew Neil's GB News (and another new service) is none other than the BBC's Jon Sopel.
The Observer introduces his contribution by saying that he "sees the promised channels as a greater potential threat to democracy than Britain’s already openly biased newspapers."
And what is Jon Sopel then quoted as saying by The Guardian/Observer?
Well, he's quoted at some length but I can sum it all up in a few words: He thinks that he's getting it about right, and that the BBC and the other existing main UK news channels are also getting it about right. Why? Because, he says, he and they seek to be 'fair' and 'balanced' and don't propagandise.
Paging Mandy Rice-Davies!
And pull the other one!
I'm surprised Andrew Neil hasn't commented on this on Twitter yet, as far as I can see (and I've checked). Wonder what he thinks of Jon Sopel's appearance in this anti-GB News piece?
*******
UPDATE: On a related theme, and fresh in...SHOCK NEWS!!! The Guardian (which 'some say' is the inky wing of the BBC) comes out in favour of the BBC:
Martin Daubney: Absolute cobblers here from BBC’s North America Editor who sees new British TV channels as a “threat to democracy”. If the BBC & the rest had been impartial over Brexit/Trump/COVID we might not need alternatives. Bring it on - and let the market decide!Ella T: The BBC's Jon Sopel said what? Can there be a more biased, warped individual reporting from USA than him? The gravy train for him and his ilk is coming to an end.Richard Hammonds: Sopel has been a Trump hater from day one. Every single report he makes is negative biased and twisted. Just watch him about turn into the 'love-in' mode for Biden. Utter garbage is the BBC. It is now a propaganda unit not a news outlet.
Sunday, 10 January 2021
Sooner, tougher, longer
This time last week Andrew Neil was criticising Andrew Marr for his Boris Johnson interview, saying "Another interview with the Government in which the broadcaster’s sole theme is — why didn’t you/don’t you lockdown, sooner, tougher, longer?".
Well, this week's Andrew Marr interview with Sir Keir Starmer was a close variation on that and AN might well have tweeted this week, "Another interview with the Opposition in which the broadcaster’s sole theme is — why didn’t you/don’t you call for lockdown, sooner, tougher, longer?".
It began:
Andrew Marr: Last week I spoke to the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, in the first of our Leaders interviews this year. This morning I’m joined here in the studio by the Leader of the Labour Party, Sir Keir Starmer. Sir Keir, welcome. Are these new rules tough enough?
Sunday, 3 January 2021
Andrew Neil sees it
Andrew Neil on Andrew Marr's interview with Boris Johnson this morning:
Another interview with the Government in which the broadcaster’s sole theme is — why didn’t you/don’t you lockdown, sooner, tougher, longer?
I'm watching now, and that's exactly how it's going. 'Sole theme' is spot-on.
Saturday, 17 October 2020
Is Baroness Hoey being lined up to be the next BBC chairwoman?
| Kate Hoey:The next BBC chairwoman? |
Have any of you been mooted as the new BBC chairman yet? Pretty much everyone else has, if you believe the papers.
The latest headlines concern the Europhile former chancellor and 'man of a hundred jobs already', George Osborne. Having failed to land the plum Royal Opera House job, the Daily Telegraph's Choppers now claims the Government is "lining him up" to replace Sir David Clementi.
There are lots of 'woulds' and 'ifs' in the article and Christopher Hope adds that "some government sources" have "downplayed" for the ex-chancellor's chances. The piece ends by saying, "Mr Osborne declined to comment" and "The Daily Telegraph understands that he has not yet been approached about the role".
So frankly we're barely any further on that when George Osborne was first mooted weeks ago.
Andrew Neil, for one, doesn't reckon much to the story. "I bet he's not", he tweeted in response to the headline about Mr Osborne being "lined up" by the Government.
Anyone who wants drastic surgery to save the BBC won't be looking to Mr Osborne, who would be almost as bad as David Dimbleby. Michael Portillo, Trevor Phillips or Sir Robbie Gibb would be better bets.
No one's mentioned Kate Hoey though, have they? Should we start a rumour here in her favour and pass it onto the Telegraph? Yes, let's! I've a feeling "some government sources" might possibly have mentioned her at some stage, and she'd be great.
Saturday, 26 September 2020
"Much-loved"
The BBC's statement on Andrew Neil's departure from the BBC was pleasingly warm:
BBC statement on @afneil pic.twitter.com/kEK8smC8QN
— BBC News Press Team (@BBCNewsPR) September 25, 2020
Sunday, 20 September 2020
Charles Moore for BBC chairman?
Well, if the sources in Downing Street cited by the Mail on Sunday's political editor Glen Owen are correctly reflecting a serious, determined intent on the part of Mr Cummings & Co. to replace the departing Sir David Clementi as Chairman of the BBC with Charles Moore of all people then that would probably be the biggest shock to the BBC's system since time immemorial.
The newly ennobled Lord Moore of Etchingham is definitely the cat the BBC pigeons would least prefer to have put among them.
Unlike Sir David, Charles Moore wouldn't go native. Under him, the BBC would be shaken up, beginning next February.
It's quite a tantalising thought. But is the Government brave enough?
*******
Andrew Neil is being characteristically droll about it, even employing the time-honoured "choking on their muesli" crack:
BBC executives were choking on their muesli when it was reported that I was in the running to be next Chairman of the BBC. I have no interest in the job. But now the Daily Mail is reporting Charles Moore is favourite for the post, I expect BBC to be begging me to take it.
Monday, 14 September 2020
Andrew Neil has his say again
And here he is again.
Andrew Neil: When it comes to the EU the British media’s general default position is to treat anything UK government does as a deceit/lie/obfuscation/matter for ridicule, while treating anything out of Brussels as gospel. When did you last see a Barnier-type given a tough interview?
What a good question!
Andrew Neil has his say
And talking of Andrew Neil, here he is:
Andrew Neil: Now that Bahrain has joined the UAE in recognising Israel, Saudi Arabia cannot be far behind. A sea-change in the geopolitics of the Middle East is underway, leaving the Palestinian leadership isolated.
İyad el-Baghdadi: When Israel's "diplomatic progress" depends upon normalizing relationships with Arab dictators, it follows that democracy in the Arab region would be a severe diplomatic setback for Israel. Israel's regional ally is dictatorship.
Andrew Neil: If Israel was to limit its dealings to Arab countries not run by dictators, it would very quickly run out of Arab countries to talk to. Indeed it would soon be talking to itself.
Sunday, 13 September 2020
Peace again
The piece deal between Israel and Bahrain is another historic breakthrough, following Israel's recent peace deal with the United Arab Emirates.
The BBC hasn't paid it much attention, but their Jerusalem reporter Tom Bateman has covered it. He ended his report on the story with the following, downbeat pay-off line:
The Gulf countries believe their move could nudge forward an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but critics see more self-interest than peacemaking for the parties involved. Tom Bateman, BBC News, Jerusalem.
Earlier in his report, which stressed how the deal "leaves the Palestinians feeling sidelined", he'd seemed to be giving succour to those critics himself by stressing the "new security ties" that could develop "among countries that share a common adversary in Iran".
A contrasting take comes from Andrew Neil on Twitter:
Now that Bahrain has joined the UAE in recognising Israel, Saudi Arabia cannot be far behind. A sea-change in the geopolitics of the Middle East is underway, leaving the Palestinian leadership isolated.
Consider this from the state-backed Saudi Gazette: "Palestinian politicians have sabotaged negotiations and rejected all peace initiatives for six decades in order to keep the aid funds flowing to their private bank accounts."
Or this: Bahraini activist: “Growing awareness among many in Arab world that Jewish people not foreign colonialists in Land of Israel, but part of this land, and part of our region… it’s a fact, and we can do many things together for prosperity, security and peace for region.”
And Abu Dhabi's official National newspaper: “The UAE-Israel accord is a win for every Muslim … Since 9/11, Muslims across the world have been on the defensive. I saw the suspicion of Muslims in the eyes of American officials. It always boiled down to: show us peace in Islam. Now, with visionary accord between UAE and Israel, a new horizon is opening to reinstate Muslim dignity by showing peace between peoples. We can now say: ‘A new way of co-existence is achievable. We are not pawns for mullahs of Iran or the Muslim Brotherhood. Look at the UAE.’”
Saturday, 12 September 2020
You know it makes sense
The news that Andrew Neil looks set to return to the BBC with an enhanced role, with Tim Davie highlighting his importance by talking to him on Zoom on his second day in the job, is a good sign.
Mr Davie's prompt call stands in marked contrast to the previous BBC regime which, according to the Daily Telegraph, didn't contact him even once after his programme was taken off air.
The downside, of course, is that Andrew might have to tone down his barbed remarks about the Corporation again.
A constructive suggestion: How about moving Newsnight to 8pm and replacing Emily Maitlis with Andrew Neil?
And why not lure back Giles Dilnot in place of Lewis Goodall too?
Friday, 31 July 2020
Further to Arthur T's post...
Monday, 27 July 2020
But doesn't this apply to the BBC too?
Litigious news and other stories
This on antisemitism by @afneil was a depressing, yet informative, explanation on how it spreads on the Left and in so-called academia. pic.twitter.com/RGFdiJeDTa
— Darren Grimes (@darrengrimes_) July 25, 2020
A Go Fund Me page set up to finance the former Labour leader's court battles has raised £231,000 due in part to the generosity of self-proclaimed racists.[…]“Among the most generous donors are former deputy leader of Liverpool City Council Derek Hatton who’s given £1,000, prominent anti-Israel campaigner and Labour member Susanne Levin who’s offered £500 and music producer Brian Eno, who’s provided £500.”
"MCB secretary general Sir Iqbal Sacranie complained the show was "purposefully trying to sabotage" the progress Muslims were making in the political mainstream.Panorama reporter John Ware also found groups affiliated to the MCB promoting anti-Semitic views, the belief that Islam was a superior ideology to secular British values and the view that Christians and Jews were conspiring to undermine Islam.MCB secretary general Sir Iqbal Sacranie complained the show was "purposefully trying to sabotage" the progress Muslims were making in the political mainstream."John Ware's team have made a deeply unfair programme using deliberately garbled quotes in an attempt to malign the Muslim Council of Britain," he said.
"The former general manager of Islamic Relief UK, Waseem Yaqub, today accepted undisclosed libel damages and a public apology from the BBC at London’s High Court over a Panorama programme called Faith, Hate and Charity.Mr Justice David Eady was told that the programme was broadcast on BBC One and investigated the London-based charity Interpal which gives funds to charities on the West Bank to help needy Palestinians.It was said to reveal that some of the charities were linked to Hamas and helped build support for the movement by spreading Islamist ideology.
Anti-Semitism: Labour pays damages for 'hurt' to whistleblowersThe party has issued an unreserved apology in the High Court for making "false and defamatory" comments about seven whistleblowers who spoke out in a BBC Panorama programme last year.The individuals had criticised the then leadership's handling of complaints.”
Labour’s agony over anti-Semitism far from over
Astonishing still that the Labour Party, a political movement based on fighting for equality and against racism, found itself in a situation where its members and officials have been playing out a battle over anti-Semitism for so long - on the airwaves, in constituency meetings, in executive meetings and also in the courts. The argument is not settled.”
Corbyn-era Labour figures may challenge antisemitism settlement by Jessica Elgot and Lisa O'CarrollSenior party members understood to be mulling legal action over verdict on treatment of whistleblowers“Key figures in Labour when Jeremy Corbyn was leader are mulling a challenge to the party’s settlement with a BBC journalist and seven of its former staff over a libel case relating to a Panorama programme last year about its handling of antisemitism.It is understood the former Labour leader himself as well as his former director of communications Seumas Milne have taken legal advice about the settlement and apology set to be read at the high court on Wednesday.”
Antisemitism settlement plunges Labour party into civil war
“Jeremy Corbyn’s statement caused astonishment among litigants in libel action.Labour’s decision to pay a six-figure libel settlement to ex-staffers who claimed the party was failing to deal with antisemitism has plunged the party back into civil war, with Jeremy Corbyn publicly condemning his successor’s decision to settle the case.Corbyn’s statement caused astonishment among the litigants in the libel action, with the Panorama journalist John Ware confirming to the Guardian that he was “consulting his lawyers” and raising the prospect of another costly court battle over Labour and antisemitism.[…]Mark Lewis, the solicitor who acted for Ware and the whistleblowers, revealed to the Guardian that he had been approached by 32 individuals who want to take action against the party for a range of allegations, mainly centring on the fallout from the leaked report.
"John Ware explains why he sued the Labour Party - and why his case is merely the first of several against alt-Left sites and individuals who lieA year ago, the Labour Party declared all-out war on the BBC. Why?I was the reporter on a Panorama programme in which seven former Labour staffers blew the whistle about antisemitism in Corbyn’s Labour Party. They explained how they felt a growing factionalism had created a safe space for antisemitic views inside the party.Labour responded by accusing me of having flouted journalistic ethics. I had, Labour alleged, knowingly promoted falsehoods and invented quotes. I had misrepresented and fabricated facts.You don’t need much experience of television to know that the BBC’s editorial processes simply don’t allow for such mammoth corruption of the editorial process, especially a programme that examines such an incendiary subject as the relationship between the leader of the Opposition and antisemitism. Every line of my commentary was trawled over by the editor, lawyers and the BBC’s editorial compliance panjandrums. The whistle-blowers were also extensively cross examined."
The journalist behind BBC Panorama’s on Labour’s antisemitism row is planning to sue Jeremy Corbyn for libel.Labour falsely accused Ware of “deliberate and malicious misrepresentations designed to mislead the public” regarding the show.Media lawyer Mark Lewis said: 'I can confirm that I have been instructed to pursue claims' against the former Labour leader
“The response of the Corbyn team to the allegation that Labour was not really serious about investigating antisemitism was to pour scorn on the journalistic ethics of the BBC.”
“To declare war on all of the mainstream media is a disastrously stupid strategy for any political leader. In due course, Sir Keir will be well advised to be much more forensic than this in his choice of media enemies. He will need some — a media bogeyman is always handy in politics — but it most certainly ought not to be the BBC.”
Sunday, 26 July 2020
Still hanging on in there
Andrew Gregory: Andrew Neil, excuse me if I've missed a statement, but is your programme on BBC2 on Wednesdays coming back? My 92 year old father and I looked forward to your probing, insightful interviewing, a shining beacon in the confused, chaotic and downright biased reporting of elsewhere.Andrew Neil: No. It’s not coming back. The BBC said it could come back if I accepted a new, late afternoon time in the BBC2 schedule. But BBC2 bosses did not want it back at 7pm. I declined the new time so the show was cancelled. Sorry. Thanks for your interest. Best to you and father.Liz: Bad show Rob Burley. Thumbs down 👎.Rob Burley: Hi Liz - I don't think (quite understandably) you know how these decisions are come to if you want to blame me for it. As we have said, we want a new show for Andrew sorted ASAP!Andrew Neil: If there’s blame to go round, Liz, none of it should be laid at Rob’s door.
Andrew Neil: BBC2 never wanted the show at 7pm in the first place. The then DG insisted. Now he’s gone it was no surprise to me BBC2 made a land grab to get it back.
Friday, 29 May 2020
Ho hum
And by "MSM" he's presumably including the BBC?Imagine the twitter storm tonight if this had gone the other way. It would have been of biblical proportions. For some reason it’s not getting much traction on the MSM either. Ho hum.
Thursday, 5 March 2020
Missed opportunity, retrieved
“With retrospect I should have called that out directly”. She could have said that about anytime in the last three years. https://t.co/DWKpy8eeiH— SussexFriendsofIsrael (@SussexFriends) March 4, 2020
Want to see an example of institutional racism in the Labour Party?— Euan Philipps (@EuanPhilipps) February 27, 2020
- It’s not just the guy shouting his ignorant mouth off, it’s the fact his deranged views weren’t challenged by the candidates.#LabourAntisemitism @Keir_Starmer @RLong_Bailey @lisanandy pic.twitter.com/CgwVrWztVQ
I mentioned this annoying omission in an earlier post. It certainly makes a change to see this kind of thing not being allowed to pass unchallenged.



