Thursday, 8 June 2017

Election Day

There's a striking paragraph in Steven Glover's latest Daily Mail article that I think hits the mark:

Does that seem right to you too?


  1. I agree with Steven Glover, Corbyn is the donkey with the red rosette so when the crunch comes the BBC knows what to do.
    Things aren't much better on the other side. We have Mrs. Blair doing her version of New Labour, abandoning her core support but assuming they will keep voting 'blue'.
    More and more the BBC's 'news' is becoming 'analysis', the 'facts' can be there, just, but the BBC 'interprets' them for us over and over again.
    Thus Mrs. May, once, changes what she had proposed for a 'green paper', (the consultation phase, not the legislative phase), that is news but only once. However the 'analysis' allows it to be repeated on the hour, day after day. Ditto Corbyn and crews 'gaffes' and policy inconsistencies we can be assured 'simply have no effect on his unstoppable progress', pushed as fact but in reality partisan spin.
    Perhaps the BBC should be legally required to state, "That was the news. The following is the personal opinion of ... (insert Agenda Desk Officer as required)", and put a similar warning at the end?

  2. Nah, he's the boy, the absolute boy by the way!

  3. Glover is a good analyst. He's got it right.

    For the BBC the timing of the election was all wrong. Clearly their preference was for Corbyn to be removed before the next election and for a soggy left PC globalist Macron-like figure to take over. But despite their best efforts Corbyn had clung limet-like to power.

    So the BBC went into the election trying to use the Brexit-defying Lib Dems as the wedge to frustrate May's ambitions. He was all over their screens to begin with and they pushed the Lib Dems, to no avail.

    When they saw Labour were doing much better than expected, and May was faltering, they switched tactics and have given Corbyn a makeover as Glover suggests.

    Part of the makeover has involved seriously underplaying Corbyn's links to terror groups. As part of the overall strategy, the love-in with Sadiq Khan continues (he might be the BBC's future "king"...he fits the bill in many ways) and his campaigning for Babar Ahmad, who subsequently pleaded guilty to terror-related offences. They were also very kind about Diane Abbott's meltdown(s) (can you imagine if it had been a Conservative spokeperson in a similar situation)?

    It's a dangerous game for the BBC because of course, though - in my estimation - Corbyn will lose, his power within Labour is now entrenched, in part thanks to his own strength as a campaigner but also thanks to the BBC's photoshopping of his politics.

    1. Good analysis. You might add the BBC's mistaken policy of glossing-over of the lack of affinity between Corbyn and the Scottish and Welsh Labour Parties. If his power is entrenched, (which I think it will be), it will be in London and BBC-land - not in the country as a whole. The three - Corbyn Abbott and Mcdonnell are all London MPs. The rest of the Labour MPs will be left out in the cold.

  4. Yes, the Tory campaign has been profoundly depressing - we have seen 'of what mettle/metal T. May is made' and it's not iron, more like plasticine. The BBC's bias has been appalling: yesterday's 6pm news was just a party political broadcast on behalf of the Labour party, with no pretence of balance.
    Lastly, I'd like to reiterate a plea Sue made last week: there are four consecutive comments made by 'anonymouses' in this thread, which makes it difficult to tell how many people are contributing & who is replying to whom. So, is the third comment by 'Anonymous', or is it by 'Anonymous'? - see what I mean? Imagine trying to make sense of a copy of Hamlet in which all the characters are called 'Gertrude.'If you're not sure how to use Blogger, Craig or Sue will explain the process, but if you don't want to do that perhaps you could just choose a pseudonym & make it the first word of your comment.