The BBC: are claims of political bias justified? Part 2.

I note that Auntie is busy trying to confect hysteria about an alleged "party" in number 10 a year ago. All in a day for Boris Grrrr.

Meanwhile, in trying to create another "crisis" on Omicron (having failed dismally to manufacture a booze crisis last week) they seem to be completely ignoring what is potentially a real crisis in Eastern europe. In favour of whinging about abortion limits in the US.

Uschi's suggestion that all EU citizens should be jabbed compulsorily has also disappeared off the front page....
Even the Beeb can't talk about racism everyday and Boris is always the alternative go to story and they've being desperate since day one to attribute every broken logistics or person dying with a positive covid test as blood on Boris hands.

Omicron - viruses mutate, but not to the extent covid has done and my own weak understanding of biology is a virus such as that does have a more artificial source(weak genome) that leads back to china. Interestingly, when a virus transmissionability goes up, generally its lethality goes down... What generally irritates me most about the BBC at the minute is the origins of covid is the greatest story of the century and I've seen no panorama special, or genuine BBC attempt to look at the 'conspiracies' at all. Just a desperate push to 'Get Boris' and boosters are to some extent, the government placating the Beeb with a booster.
 
The Telegraph report on the Amol Rajan apology:

BBC media editor apologises for calling Duke and Duchess of Cambridge 'total frauds' in royal documentary impartiality row

This quote amused me...

A BBC spokesman said: "This article predates Amol's work at the BBC."

"Once journalists join the BBC, they leave past views at the door."

"Amol is an experienced BBC journalist who reports on all of the topics he covers in an impartial way and in line with the BBC's editorial guidelines."

"All BBC current affairs output is required to be impartial."
 
The Telegraph report on the Amol Rajan apology:

BBC media editor apologises for calling Duke and Duchess of Cambridge 'total frauds' in royal documentary impartiality row

This quote amused me...

A BBC spokesman said: "This article predates Amol's work at the BBC."

"Once journalists join the BBC, they leave past views at the door."

"Amol is an experienced BBC journalist who reports on all of the topics he covers in an impartial way and in line with the BBC's editorial guidelines."

"All BBC current affairs output is required to be impartial."
Incredible, how gullible do the BBC think we are?
 
The Telegraph report on the Amol Rajan apology:

BBC media editor apologises for calling Duke and Duchess of Cambridge 'total frauds' in royal documentary impartiality row

This quote amused me...

A BBC spokesman said: "This article predates Amol's work at the BBC."

"Once journalists join the BBC, they leave past views at the door."

"Amol is an experienced BBC journalist who reports on all of the topics he covers in an impartial way and in line with the BBC's editorial guidelines."

"All BBC current affairs output is required to be impartial."
I'd like to see that used as a defence in court.

"It was ages ago. I was someone else then and therefore I am not the person who committed the crime. You've got the wrong bloke."
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Indeed:


The fragrant Angeluh has felt it necessary to write yet another letter to the Cab Sec:

Labour's deputy leader, Angela Rayner, wrote to Cabinet Secretary Simon Case on Thursday, saying she found it "difficult to understand" how either event could have complied with regulations.
She accused the government of "undermining public health messaging", and asked Mr Case if he would be conducting an inquiry into the events, as well as if he would refer any potential breach of the Covid regulations by the PM to the Metropolitan Police.

So outraged is she that the Met Police may be invovlved.

Or not.

:rolleyes:
This is the Labour Party that turned up en masse wearing masks in the Commons the other week, in a crude move to 'embarrass' a Tory government which is apparently not taking social distancing, etc. seriously.

The same faces who were seen cavorting at their annual conference without masks when they thought that they couldn't be seen.

Hypocrites, in other words, and the BBC can make as much noise as they like about being even-handed but they're not.

If this is the best opposition (deliberate use of lower-case 'o') that Starmer can come up with, then God help us all.
There is an ongoing and not so subtle action, predominantly by ITN, BBC and other MSM execs that have previously worked at the Guardian, to maintain a perpetual 'narrative' that PMBJ is not Prime Minister material.

It's almost like that they've decided they can't influence the public that the Government's policies are wrong because that would be castigating the public for voting for the wrong policies in the first place (bloody stupid voters etc) therefore the best way to lay the foundations for a Labour resurgence is to create and maintain the impression for voters, that the Conservative's best election winning asset is a bad egg. Especially when compared with the paragon of virtue that is the Leader of the Opposition

That said, they are succeeding in that I saw a report yesterday that, if an election was called tomorrow, the Conservatives would have a 5 seat majority. If they went into it with a different (unspecified) leader, they'd have a 38 seat majority.
I offer you this:

“I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.”

― from Margaret Thatcher, no less.

And that's what's going on again now, however many years later.
 
I'd like to see that used as a defence in court.

"It was ages ago. I was someone else then and therefore I am not the person who committed the crime. You've got the wrong bloke."
No problem. All you need to add is that you’ve changed your hairstyle since, and Bob’s* your uncle.

As long as you’re BAME, of course.



* Or Abdullah, Winston etc.
 
Indeed:


The fragrant Angeluh has felt it necessary to write yet another letter to the Cab Sec:

Labour's deputy leader, Angela Rayner, wrote to Cabinet Secretary Simon Case on Thursday, saying she found it "difficult to understand" how either event could have complied with regulations.
She accused the government of "undermining public health messaging", and asked Mr Case if he would be conducting an inquiry into the events, as well as if he would refer any potential breach of the Covid regulations by the PM to the Metropolitan Police.

So outraged is she that the Met Police may be invovlved.

Or not.

:rolleyes:
Having looked at the calendar for last December, wasn't the 18th the day when it seemed every non-Londoner was fleeing from London before Boris cancelled Christmas and put us into lockdown(again)? So, if the alleged party at No 10 was on the 18th, then it was before the additional lockdown regs came into effect. Perhaps having a big bash was ill-considered, but illegal?? Don't think so. More hot air and faux rage from the BBC, MSN and Angeluh.
 

Helm

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
Having looked at the calendar for last December, wasn't the 18th the day when it seemed every non-Londoner was fleeing from London before Boris cancelled Christmas and put us into lockdown(again)? So, if the alleged party at No 10 was on the 18th, then it was before the additional lockdown regs came into effect. Perhaps having a big bash was ill-considered, but illegal?? Don't think so. More hot air and faux rage from the BBC, MSN and Angeluh.
Are they also sickened by this?
 

BuggerAll

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I doubt if he would lower himself to anything as vulgar as a tumble with Angela. I know I wouldn't although somebody obviously did.
 
The Telegraph report on the Amol Rajan apology:

BBC media editor apologises for calling Duke and Duchess of Cambridge 'total frauds' in royal documentary impartiality row

This quote amused me...

A BBC spokesman said: "This article predates Amol's work at the BBC."

"Once journalists join the BBC, they leave past views at the door."

"Amol is an experienced BBC journalist who reports on all of the topics he covers in an impartial way and in line with the BBC's editorial guidelines."

"All BBC current affairs output is required to be impartial."
Two liars; one a 'journalist' and one an organisation which many of us are forced to subsidise. Black lies, and obvious to all.
 

Grownup_Rafbrat

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
In the meantime the volcano continues to erupt, people are dying over lithium mining in DRCongo, Russia is threatening Ukraine and NATO is responding, China is gobbling up international waters in the China Sea, Ethiopia looks about to invade Sudan, women's fertility rights are being attacked in several places, Germany is refusing the unvaccinated access to most of society...

There's much more but the inward-looking Bash Britain Corporation doesn't see it as important.

It's frightening how our nation has sleepwalked into this.
 
Last edited:
"I had that Angela Rayner in the back of my cab, once.




But then ... who hasn't?"
The thought of that vulgar dribbling spunkbucket in the back of any vehicle of mine, would force me to abandon ship imediately.
 
"Radio 4's 'hopeless yearning to connect with yoof' and 'increasingly woke' editorial choices put it at odds with its Middle England listeners."

To coin a phrase, "No shit Sherlock"
So why have the likes of Dorries and her predecessor whittingdale failed to crush the lice ?
 
So why have the likes of Dorries and her predecessor whittingdale failed to crush the lice ?
A wall of resistance from CS and the BBC alike. Add into the mix the vested interests of the House of Clowns and the Vermin in Ermine, all of whom would be largely ignored if it wasn't for the BBC providing them a free platform where they even get paid for appearing and you can see how the resistance becomes futile. IIRC, Whittingdale in an avowed fan of the Corporation having been got at early on.
 
This is the Labour Party that turned up en masse wearing masks in the Commons the other week, in a crude move to 'embarrass' a Tory government which is apparently not taking social distancing, etc. seriously.

The same faces who were seen cavorting at their annual conference without masks when they thought that they couldn't be seen.

Hypocrites, in other words, and the BBC can make as much noise as they like about being even-handed but they're not.

If this is the best opposition (deliberate use of lower-case 'o') that Starmer can come up with, then God help us all.

I offer you this:

“I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.”

― from Margaret Thatcher, no less.

And that's what's going on again now, however many years later.
The Labour Conference was in september.

At that point, there were no rules mandating wearing masks in social gatherings (unlike December last year), no ban on social gatherings (unlike Christmas last year) and no rules forbidding Christmas parties ( unlike last year).

About that time Ree-Mogg said


I'm not saying Labour were wise to act as they did, but the screeching whataboutery from the Johnson Fan Club is as notable as its off the mark.

The Tories broke the rules they set; Labour did not.
 

Latest Threads

Top