Now on YouTube: one the Jeremy Vine stunts
May 4th, 2008
Is this really “public service broadcasting”?
I started ranting about this on election night itself and my anger has not subsided even though that was three nights ago. This is simply unacceptable. The BBC cannot expect to receive licence fee income if this is how it interprets its public service remit over the reporting of the democratic process.
We need an assurance now from the Corporation that a totally different approach will be in place for the 2009 Euro and local elections. A fast and accurate results service with proper analysis as well as telling the story of night is what’s required.
Everyone concerned with election programming at the BBC should be ordered to watch CNN’s coverage of the Indiana and North Carolina primaries overnight on Tuesday and told to work out a plan to create a BBC equivalent.
That’s how results television should be handled. If the BBC cannot manage it then licence fee income should be diverted to fund an organisation that can.
There must be no repetition.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!
All about the value for the licence fee!!!
What a pile of shyte!
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
I agree 100%
It’s one poll tax the left always defends.
Mike I totally agree. It was absolutely awful pathetic rubbish.
I wrote this on the subject:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2008/05/is-it-just-me-or-has-bbc-been-pile-of.html
I had to watch Sky news at the pub for the mayoral result, as they seemed to be following it whilst the BBC was not. Incredible.
Mike - its quite strong opinion from you and to be honest its entirely justified.
Over the last 20 years BBC election has been shyte - poor analysis, dreadful graphics and most importantly as always with BBC miles behind the game!
Peter Snow excepted because he is brilliant
When I want quick results on elections or anything else eg football I turn to Sky or ITN!
It was truly appalling. Treating politics/politicians with such comtempt on s serious political event is unworthy of the BBC (plus ca change). Jeremy Vine does Points of View. Will they censor the undoubted mass criticisms, or will they make him the fall guy???. Sky’s coverage was streets ahead.
For comparision, what was the coverage on ITN and Sky? I only get BBC World here, and I was in a sordid nightclub on Thursday night…till 8am…
But, I’m moving end of the month and know Sky at least will be available.
I saw Sian Berry this afternoon. We passed at a traffic island by Archway tube.
8 Stonch - you and I dont normally agree but I loved your post about London around 0230 Sat!
N1
Agree. I’m happy to knock out a quick letter of complaint to the BBC. Who is the Controller of News? Or should it be sent to the Director General?
It seems right wingers want a biased national broadcaster and if they don’t get it they’ll slag the BBC off and jump up and down.
4. So Benedict, do you have a blog or something?
In the digital age the BBC is an indefensible monopoly and should be flogged off. I recognise that it does produce some truly oustanding programming on both TV and radio, but it also produces this cr*p.
I’m happy for us to keep some public service broadcasting, but there is no reason that it has to be the Beeb that provides it.
The difference with the Sky coverage was stark. The BBC were simply infantile and show a complete disregard for the importantce of the democratic process.
There have been suggestions that since they knew this was going to be a bad night for Labour they purposfully set out to belittle the whole thing. I actually don’t believe that but the fact they were so dire does leave them open to such accusations from those who already view the BBC as lacking objectivity when it comes to certain aspects of politics.
This was certainly emphasized again when comparing the Andrew Marr interview with Brown - where he basically let the PM have his say without challenge - to the Adam Boulton interview on Sky which was far more challenging and didn’t allow Brown to use it as his own personal press conference.
10 or you can ring 08700 100 222
Embarrassing. I couldn’t watch it all: too painful.
These days, I rarely go to the BBC for political coverage. Who does?
Yes, it was genuinely embarrassing to watch. I’m continually amazed at how the BBC repeatedly manages to plumb new depths of cringe on election nights.
4, I didn’t stay up really late to watch either results (well, I stayed up til 1.15am for the locals).
However, at one point Sky had the results from 5 of London’s constituencies for the mayoral vote. An hour later Newsshyte had results from only 4 of them!
Bloody unbelievable.
O/T Sorry, did anyone notice that Liverpool beat Man City today?
Jee-zus!! That realy is shocking!!! At one point I thought I was watching a Monty Python sketch. Luckily the bright spark who devised the shoot out at the OK Corral is on a defined pension, gold plated, etc and can afford to buy his Grauniad. I hope he blubbed Friday and Saturday morning.
How much does this clown earn a year? A National Disgrace!
When the analogue switch off happens in 2012 the govt should grasp the nettle of making BBC tv subscription only and reduce the licence fee to a few pounds to cover a limited radio service if they feel the need to keep a licence fee for that service. Then we can choose to spend £135 on the BBC or not.
Re 11, Stonch “It seems right wingers want a biased national broadcaster and if they don’t get it they’ll slag the BBC off and jump up and down.”
Are you calling Mike Smithson a right winger?
Did you watch the BBC’s election coverage?
Re 12, Guy “4. So Benedict, do you have a blog or something? ;)”
Might have. I only tell a select few though. I like to keep it a secret
Particularly appalling because (inter alia) after midnight on Thursday in particular, the audience would have been entirely composed of serious politics-watchers keen to obtain — but not getting — hard data/info. This programme was insulting to their audience, contemptuous of the political process and damaging to democracy. It also says a great deal about the quality of the editors and production team who may well be very wet behind the ears… which is no excuse. They should be fired.
11. LOL - seems I meet your criteria!
We’ve already got a biased broadcaster (according to no less than Mr Marr, who should know), and it’s pretty unfair that you should have to pay for it regardless.
9 - you’ve made me want to go back and search for that post…I know for a fact I was a wee bit tipsy at that time (I’d just finished a day in my pub and then moved on to someone else’s for after hours fun).
It’s remarkable how much conversation there’s been about the London elections in boozers this week. Just today I was at a pub in Highgate and fell into a long convo with an extremely left wing couple who were very upset about Boris being elected.
I am already entirely reconciled with the result and wish the new mayor well. Although I am unhappy that Boris has been elected by the suburbs to rule over people like myself who live in “real” London, I am optimistic about him.
This would have been bad if it had been covering something like the Texas Gubernatorial Election. Covering the London mayoralty and English council elections, it’s simply ridiculous. What on Earth were they thinking?
11. I do think the BBC could be more balanced. Do you genuinely think it’s straight down the centre in its reporting?
Lets close the BBC down - waste of space
Sky can take it over
I favour an increased role for Emily Maitlis (this post won’t get deleted will it LOL)
I went to bed in disgust. Vine is in an irritating presenter at the best of times, he was beyond parody on Friday morning. However, what followed was worse. We cut to Colchester where a so called correspondent was able to say that votes had been cast and that there had been results, what results? Thank goodness for blogs.
Then it went to Lincoln, in the counting hall, and comments about Hull but no result from either place.
The endless Dimbleby chats with his friends, all spinning like fury is a waste of time.
I want to know what has happened including gains and losses and where. Actual stories from counting centres (based on facts and resulkts) would be interesting. Seeing the coin tossed that decided Hastings would have been an innovation, although the BBC would probably have discussed the events of the year the coin was minted.
The BBC US coverage is equally pathetic. Instead of results endless chat and spin. In 2004 the BBC were in no mans land when all three major US channels had called the election.
Please, please can we have a results programme back.
11
We have had a biased boradcaster for the last 20 years. Any organisation that only recruits through adverts in left wing newspapers must have a good idea of the sort of people they want.
The trouble is that I want the BBC to succeed. If done well then the Licence fee is - to some extent at least - justified. What is now being risked is a future givernment decideing that the BBC is so institutionally biased that it cannot be saved and we then end up losing all the good stuff along with the political bias.
Mike i totally agree
i addition i was disappointed on saturday morning that the BBc did do show Boris and kens speeches
after raised turnout and a campaign had interested the electorate the BBC decided to show 15 second clips in it 9 am news of the speeches but several minutes of bbc journalists talking banalities amongst themselves - showing that they thought they were more important than the news - quite simply an appalling performance -
11 STONCH back on form LOL
OK thats the alliance over - i can remember when it started and finished LOL
11 - I am sure that you’re just being deliberatley provacative there. The fact that it was infantile and pathetic has nothing to do with political bias. The cowboy crap was actually anti Lib-Dem. Something I would applaud if I was being partisan. I don’t applaud it bacause it was dismal, unfunny, irrelevant and unworthy of even a media studies A-level student. Let alone the national broadcaster.
I agreed that it was awful. Jeremy Vine as the new Peter Snow could be interesting, but these clips were fundamentally useless whoever did them. Snow’s swingometer was always “just a bit of fun” but genuinely was fun - and informative! It showed in a fun way what the percentages could mean in seats, what did missing a tin can show? Or last year’s virtual rapping “Lib Dem Ming, with his Lib Dem Bling”
The classic swingometer might not work because of three party politics now, but it’d still be far more fun and useful than any of this. How about a 3d swingometer, or three swingometers for the 3 different battles (Tory v Lab, Tory v LD, LD v Lab).
32 The worst thing for me was Anthony King, who had the appearance of a stuffed dummy.
I must admit that Jeremy Vine’s turn on that video is very embarrassing.
Sorry Stonch. Real London is the City and Westminster - which voted overwhelmingly for Boris. Highgate is a suburb, you know the place where Dick Whittington walked up the Hill, heard the bells, looked across the fields and turned again.
This suburb/London is another myth that needs to be debunked.
29, I concur that a licence fee is justifiable for quality, non-partisan work.
As all here seem to agree, the BBC is neither quality nor non-partisan particularly in the crucial arena of news and specifically politics.
Always raises a smile when they refer to the evil of ’state TV’ in places like China.
32 - I was making a separate point and I’ll be honest and say I hadn’t watched the video when I typed my comment at 11.
its absolutley symtomatic of the BBC dumbing down to get ratings (except here it was totally flawed in its thought processes. My BBC local radio station has been asking its listeners to call in if their job beings with the letter A B C D E F etc etc and Have you got a mouse in your kitchen? Pathetic nonsense. I would on balance vote for the abloition of the license fee, but that won’t bring back quality broadcasting. Commercial stuff is mainly trash, and SKY cannot be allowed to have a monopoly. Its a vexed question what to do about the BBC , but quality control along the lines of OFSTED wouldnt be a bad idea…
Re 35, Stonch “I must admit that Jeremy Vine’s turn on that video is very embarrassing.”
So we are not all rabid right wing loons* for criticising the BBC then?
(*I am not saying some are not though;)
36 - hmmm I hear what you’re saying but I disagree that places like Barking and Bromley and Romford are really London.
OT: Iain Dale’s reported that at least certain parts of C&N are less than enthused at the prospect of the excellent Gwyneth Dunwoody’s daughter being parachuted in.
18. No, but champ-ee-o-nezz !!
If anyone can stomach it you can watch the whole lot again on BBCi player.
The coverage was woeful. Sky coverage was far more slick and professional. The Beeb really needs to up its game.
43
WBA
WBA
WBA
WBA
Three seasons: Autumn Winter and Spring hehehehehe
Evening all
Re: 4 - Good to see you, back, Benedict. Did you ever set up that blog of yours you were thinking about ?
I’ll be honest - I didn’t watch the BBC coverage so I probably shouldn’t comment on it. I think the Beeb has a problem because of the growth of specialist channels. In all manner of areas, from political coverage to cookery to horse racing, there is or are specialist channels out there.
You can’t compare the Beeb to Sky News, CNN or Fox News. The last three are specialist news and politics channels. Fox News isn’t poor because of its pro-GOP slant - it’s poor because hour after hour it effectively re-analyses one or two stories with another group of conservative analysts or Charles Krauthammer.
Unfortunately, given that not everyone has access to specialist channels, the Beeb has to try to cover these events but pitch it not to the level of the political anorak or pb.com contributor but to a different level. Inevitably, non-specialist coverage will always compare poorly with specialist coverage.
Final thought - I wonder if we can paraphrase Smithson’s Law on polls to broadcasters - the biased broadcaster is the one that says things you don’t agree with…
It wasn’t only the abysmal production values and lack of reporting on the BBC TV coverage but the slowness of BBCi web updates, particularly on Friday night. The BBC on Friday were probably trying not to appear “metropolitan” so cut away from the count at end of Newsnight but then had no-one updating BBCi.
Anecdote alert - was rather shocked today when someone said “I was watching the news and thought it was really poor then I realised TV was tuned to the BBC and not Sky” - I want the BBC to be what it claims to be, the best news broadcaster in the world.
42
I think this is yet another tactical error on the part of Labour. If she had been an activist or lived in the area they might have been able to use a touch of gentle spin to make it seem reasonable.
But without that it really does make it look like they are saying to the electorate “Don’t worry about policy or even having someone who knows anything about politics. Just vote for this woman because she is the daughter of your former MP”.
It is crass and I think will backfire since it patronises the people of C&N.
46, “the Beeb has to try to cover these events but pitch it not to the level of the political anorak or pb.com contributor but to a different level.”
Perhaps, though I think we all agree that pitching it to the level of a drooling retard is neither entertaining nor helpful.
Like PtP, I couldn’t stand to watch more than a few seconds.
Political teletubbies come the GE anyone?
Tinkiwinkie dipsey lala and po….I am sure we could all find political figures to fit. Where’s that number? Off to ring the BBC with this simply genius idea….
F*** off Stonch, no offence. Places like Bromley and Romford are TOTALLY London. Just because bearded lefty drips like you might not “approve” of them, politically, doesn’t gainsay that.
Indeed the white, working class residents of places like Romford have more claims to being real Londoners than most of us: given that they are largely descended from real cockneys, who were displaced in the middle of the last century by the 1. Blitz and 2. the post-war new town schemes.
Yer ‘avin a larf, aintcha?
47, and I want Clemency Burton-Hill to knock on my door wearing nothing but bunny ears and edible underwear. I’m not sure which turn of events is more likelt to occur:p
If Nu Lab is serious about this idea that money from the licence fee could go to other broadcasters to deliver PSB requirements then - who knows - in the future PB.com may be able to put together a very convincing case for covering the election!
Re 46, Stodge, “Re: 4 - Good to see you, back, Benedict. Did you ever set up that blog of yours you were thinking about ? :)”
Many thanks.
The blog? Yes I did , its here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
I like to keep it a bit quiet though…
I think anyone who disagrees with this type of coverage should write into Newswatch about it - I have.
43 - A bit painful for me Alan. A team managed by an ex-Hibby with an ex-jambo banging in goals for them!
All together now (to the tune of yellow submarine)
Tony Mowbray’s got a f*****g monkey’s heid, a f*****g monkey’s heid, a f*****g monkey’s heid!
Spot the difference
http://www.votawphotography.com/photo/Animals/114-Proboscis%20Monkey.jpg
http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00406/mowbray_280×390_406604a.jpg
I thought it was funny. I mean, it was true car crash TV stuff, and from that angle it was so bad it was funny. It was just completely embarassing. Jermey Vine has always been an exhibitionist, though. Anybody remember Chidren In Need a few years ago?
BBC’s election coverage has been a joke for years, though.
53 That’s a Tory idea floated last autumn that someone (Andy Burnham?) picked up and put in a speech - the Guardianistas won’t let it happen (threatens pay packets)
42. We will have to see if its just afew bloggers who are hardly representative of the norm [look around you
] of if its more widespread.
Is the benefit of the doubt factor still there in sad circustances or are people past even that?
I think we can assume that Jonathan Dimbleby’s politics are well to the left of those of his elder brother, but on which side of the fence does David sit exactly?
59, the report referred to the views expressed in a C&N local paper.
52 - yes i quite like her
I also like Emily Maitlis
Stonch/51 - i am pure London also even tho i only live 200 yards from Herts borders
Re: 54 - True, Benedict, those people who go around promoting their own blogs…
http://aloadofoldstodge.blogspot.com
Have they no shame ?
46. But Fox isn’t poor - it’s actually quite good. That’s the point. Anyone who had watched the primary coverage, on US telly, knows that Fox is actually quite admirable. Solid, smart, deft, reliable, quick.
Yes the commentary is slanted - though not as badly as some lefties in Britain seem to think - but the actual election news reporting is speedy and unbiased.
It puts all British broadcasters to shame - certainly the Beeb.
60 Bullington Boy Dave Dimbleby? Ex managing director of his family publishing firm? Probably a Lib Dem….
51 “Places like Bromley and Romford are TOTALLY London.”
Can’t speak for Bromley, SeanT, (sarf of the river, ennit?) but can confirm that Romford was colonised by migrating cockneys long ago. Whatever the geographic facts, culturally it very much London.
London
London
London
Con rules here!!!!
61. Not in the article. They are all quotes from coments left on the papers website in response to a factual no opinion article.
What I’d like to see from the BBC, now I actually put some thought into it, is for BBC Parliament to be relaunched as BBC Politics- something that with the imminent switch to universal digital tv would be available to everyone.
The Daily Politics and Question Time with its extended spot afterwards would obviously figure in the scheduling, and live coverage of Parliament could be made available through the mystical “red button”. That leaves the BBC with several hours with which they could get proper guests in to discuss events, scan blogs for breaking news, interview politicians and commentators, discuss newspaper columns, analyse polling and so forth. There’d also be scope for specific features on the political system that could fulfill the educational side of the BBC’s remit, hopefully meaning that the specific election coverage could stick to the serious business of gathering and reporting on results.
Re: 51 & 66 - As a Londoner myself (Dad from Charlton, Mum from Forest Gate), I slightly resent the fact that the worldview of Londoners comes from “Eastenders” and an image of Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins.
Londoners come in all shapes, sizes, colours and creeds…
To disagree with you (which I enjoy), Mr Stodge Senior now resides in Orpington. He recently opined that if Orpington residents were given the choice of being part of London or part of Kent, the Kent option would win by a mile. Similar views might exist in other fringe areas like Purley or maybe Cheam (comparison with Surrey).
Out of interest anybody know if Jeremy Vine is related to former TV host and the host of Snooker, David Vine?
66. I can speak for Bromley (given that no one else will!). Got mates who have lived there - have been there many times. It’s chavvy cockney urban overspill mixed with leafy-ish Surbiton, sprinkled lightly with recent immigrants. Typical London, in other words.
I truly resent this snobbish Guardianista attitude that says real London is only the inner boroughs, populated by bien pensant lawyers and their Gambian au pairs - who can be relied upon to vote Labour.
Whatever happened to the left, to make them so odious? Tsk.
Re 63, Stodge,Re: 54 - True, Benedict, those people who go around promoting their own blogs…
http://aloadofoldstodge.blogspot.com
Have they no shame ?
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
Apparently not!
Didn’t they have tories as apes in previous years ? They don’t seem to learn. Why do they think they have to dumb down so much, it’s not as though it’s ever going to get a large audience. Will not even bother next time, as others have said Sky was far superior.
65 Ted - that’s what I reckoned, particularly with his Richmond background.
70 Fairynuff, Stodge. But who wants to be identified with Essex?!
Stonch , the other day you asked me a wuestion about bar billiards , this site gives details of various leagues and pubs with bar billiard tables http://barbilliards.proboards30.com . You may feel it worth a link on your own blog .
Has anyone seen this blog - its really good!
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
Anyway
London London London London
Its all about the Con control!
77 I’ve got a shiny new 5p. Would you like it for your collection?!
When it was only possible to have 3 or 4 TV channels, the BBC and the licence fee made sense. But those days will soon be long gone.
After digital switch-over in 2012, the BBC should be allowed to continue as it is but with the subscription VOLUNTARY. If you want it, you pay for it. If you don’t want it, you don’t.
From 2012, TV will be no different to newspapers or magazines. Should we have a compulsory government newspaper that you have to buy before you can buy any others? Or how about a compulsory government magazine? Such ideas would be considered farcical even in the Soviet Union.
In spite of the above, people will say that without the BBC and the licence fee we’ll lose “quality public service broadcasting”. I would dispute that (eg as above Sky election coverage far better than the BBC) but even if there was a valid argument here the fact is that at least 80% of BBC output is just “entertainment” anyway which can be found on numerous other channels.
How can public funding possibly be required for singing competitions and quiz shows? If it has to continue it should be strictly for quality news, current affairs, documentaries, natural history etc ONLY. If this was done the fee would fall from the current £139.50 to about £25 to £30.
63 Stodge - read your blog, think you are right about this being the peak(ish) of Tory advance in local Government - next years locals are mostly Tory held IIRC and there will probably be at most a plateau till 2011, when the in office decline begins.
78, I have a complaint about that blog.
“From the ridiculous Stalin to Mr Bean stuff, the cold winter bit or the wild west show over the Liberal Democrat vote that Jeremy Vine did last night to the lack of rolling results as they came in for the London mayoral elections the BBC has been a large pile of fetid urine soaked manure of the most odious kind.”
You spelt ‘foetid’ the American way.
Er, unless you’re American obviously, in which case that makes sense.
When I lived in Vauxhall I thought of myself as living in Surrey. It must have been the fact I spend many happy days in the Oval pavilion.
If you are going to extend London to the London boroughs you can’t suggest that one borough is any ‘more’ London than others. You either think London is the square mile or you accept the municipal boundaries.
I’m glad it is not just me that is fuming. Lots of people have posted on the BBC’s Points of View messageboard complaining about the coverage but strangely Jeremy Vine did not mention this when he presented Points of View this afternoon. (The same as Terry Wogan never mentioned the hundred of complaints on the board about his Children in Need fee when he presented Points of View).
I have been scanning blogs and I’ve found over 200 complaints and only two mildly pro-Jeremey Vine comments; these were on Comment is Free and one said he wasn’t THAT bad and the other said “Give him a chance.”
Last year I posted on the Points of View board complaining about the gimmicky Ming’s Bling and the BBC reacts by putting on something even worse this year.
And as for the BBC’s Budget Day coverage which features Jade Goody giving her views as to what should be in the budget….words fail me.
There are two issues, BBC bias in terms of politics and the quality of other programming. The first one is a real issue, the second one much less so, there is too much which apes commercial TV though and, instead of similar shows, the BBC should stick to the more quality dramas and such as Natural History programmes that it does so much better.
Jeremy Vine looked and sounded embarrassed, was he forced to do it? If it was his own idea he should have turned the gun on himself…….
18 “O/T Sorry, did anyone notice that Liverpool beat Man City today?”
Yeah, okay rub it in then.
I was at the Moocamp yesterday (Milton Keynes Dons’ ground, watching Morecambe in a valiant rearguard action), over 17,000 there, the best ever attendance in Division 2, of those about 250 were supporting Morecambe. All together (to the tune of ‘Go West’) ‘It’s not a town….it’s a roundabout…..not a town….it’s a roundabout)
82 raise the complaint with the owner then - its not me!!!
Its benedict someone
70. But Orpington IS in Kent, and Cheam IS in Surrey, and Purley IS in Surrey. Meanwhile Bromley IS in London.
That’s, er, the difference. These neglected outer boroughs are dismissed by snobs as being “not real London”. But they are politically part of London, they are economically dominated by London, they provide much of London’s workforce, they pay taxes like any other regions of London, and they are largely populated by ex-central Londoners.
And they do this cause they are a part of London. So they also vote in London. Good.
I’m trying to decide whether it actually was worse than Ming’s Bling. I think Ming’s Bling was the worst thing I have ever seen on television.
And yes, I have seen EastEnders.
YES the Watford crushed the Blackpool 1-1 today and will go on to face the unlucky Hull in the play off SFs!!!!!!!!!!!!
CON GAIN EVERYTHING
88 LOL I couldnt believe that when i saw it but this is worse.
Vine = a *
89. The mighty Bristol City will be awaiting you in the final though…
91 hope so
Colin W = LOL
But you know we wil prevail…..
Ellington on the 120…………
W
A
T
F
O
R
D
Con gain
56. Do you think the Jambos might manage a top-six finish next season, Max? (I’ll be a happy with a top-17 finish for WBA)
85 LOL - btw love the name “Moocamp” - is this a reference to MK’s legendary concrete cows, which I feel sure are no more - they should have been listed.
Sorry for the ref’ce to today’s footy result, it had to be mentioned you understand.
Ave at 90. The only reaction I have had so far from the BBC to my complaints was an email telling me that one of my messages had been censored because I described Jeremy Vine as making a t**t of himself (I described it like that with asterisks) How can that be censored? For all they know I could be describing him as a twit. I think that just sums up the BBC’s attitude.
89. Will you be going to watch the away leg, Ave It?
Then you will have been to Hull and back!
(sorry, had to be said).
94 - No idea Alan. I’ll wait to see who the managers going to be before making any predictions.
At the moment its only the excellent steak pies they sell at Tynie that keeps me going!
96 actually you should have called him a c***.
(Sorry i know lots of women dont like that word)
More seriously BBC are not interested in peoples’ opinion - just like Labour are not interested in consultation!
98 Hearts = LOL
Will you ever win everything?
One of the worst things about the BBC is that the people working there all swear blind that they are neutral. Yet they are almost entirely recruited from the Guardianista class.
So they TRY and be neutral but their world view is one-dimensional.
I know lots of Labour-leaning friends at the Beeb, I don’t know any Tories there. I’m not saying there are none, but it is certainly not balanced.
64. The thing about Fox is it varies. Sometimes it is very good factual analysis, with brief even-handed analysis. Other times its simply hours of programming dedicated to keeping Democrats scandal in the news, or extensive fear-mongering about how one group of evil liberal-socialists is destroying America.
97 I’m not even going to the home leg - got to wash my hair
Might watch it on sky.
Bet Gera never thought he’d get back to the Prem with WBA
101 David - that’s not fair. There’s Terry Wogan, Jeremy Clarkson …..um……..um ……
Re 82, Morris dancer “You spelt ‘foetid’ the American way.
Er, unless you’re American obviously, in which case that makes sense.”
Sorry, no excuses I am no American.
According to the American spell checker I am using now you spelt spelt wrong
105 - i think you should start a blog…….
OT, pivitol moment;
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/
Martin Baxter now predicts a healthy, 56 seat Conservative majority based on the past months polls.
87 But Orpington IS in Kent, and Cheam IS in Surrey, and Purley IS in Surrey.
Like Bromley, all three of these places have been in Greater London since 1965 - they only retain their historical allegiance on the postcode (although the emotional break has not been fully made, and the administrative one was difficult - Surrey’s county headquarters took years after 1965 to move from Kingston, the traditional county town).
101 - There was quite a revealing comment from the former head of news at BBC Scotland who said he was a news junkie and watched CNN and ‘even’ Fox.
Still if and when the Tories win a GE I’m sure that broadcasting house will be littered with champagne bottles just as it was in ‘97.
108 - As long as they don’t move the cricket ground
I find Lods and The Oval the most convincing arguments for me not to leave London. Working nights and living here means I get to go to lots of final days of test matches on the cheap.
ok con gain everything y’all
goodnight pardners…….
I agree, completely appalling coverage. The message needs to get through to the BBC, so as to ensure an intelligent approach to General Election programming. May I suggest that you all complain via the BBC website - it is easy to do. They will listen if we complain in enough numbers. Best to critisise the programme generally rather than Vine particularly IMHO.
Re 106 Ave It “105 - i think you should start a blog…….”
I’ll give it some thought
81. Are you sure about next years locals. Surely it’s a load of county seats where the general election’s been held on the same date. We have 3 seats out of 8 in our seat at the moment and are looking to make it at least 6 our of 8.
Spare your tears for Middlesex!
A perfectly decent ‘place’ completely dismembered and now no more.
Except an echo that remains in the arcane Royal Mail Postal Towns system. Middlesex LIVES!!!
114 - The cricket team has been dead bad for a while
89. Crushed the Blackpool 1-1…..
Nothing like a crushing draw, no doubts.
108 Tangent
Are there any parts of Surrey, Essex etc lobbying to be included in London, or where the residents identify with London rather than their county ?
OK - to be clear from the start, I am in favour of the BBC being fully funded by the license fee. I am not in favour of it being withdrawn or substantially reduced. Nicities over.
Tom Lehrer once said satire died the day that Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize. Had satire survived, having Jade Goody offer her comment on the budget would surely have finished it off. The ‘Ming’s bling’ was another disgrace, the Daily Politics version of ‘Show Me the Way to Amarillo’ made me wretch, and the awful, baying, uncontrolled partisan audience undermined the London Mayoral debates that, although Andrew Neil was prepared, only contributed to a sneering that the BBC considers (on the back of the successes of Paxman and Humphreys) to be a substitute for incisive interrogation.
The Jeremy Vine stunt was a new and drastic low. Trying to explain it to a friend who missed it, I could only describe the way it made me want to chew off my own arm in embarassment - I cannot believe that it will not be mentioned in his obituary in 20 years or so as the moment that his reputation as a serious journalist was forever lost and his career aspirations effectively ended.
The Daily Politics has become a drab and pedestrian analysis slot, Question Time borders on the shrill and ochlocratic, and the News is now only a vehicle for Vox Pop emails/texts and Newspaper Round-up. The line between authoritative [expert and trustworthy] journalism and legitimated [popularly acclaimed] journalism (blogs, vox pop, talk radio) has been blurred, with the BBC failing to do the former as well as the British print media and failing to do the latter anywhere near as well as the blogosphere.
There is a laziness, a condescension, and a chumminess about the BBC’s attempts at political coverage. It boths panders and patronises its audiences, simultaneously managing to seem desperate to please and yet unable to respect the British voting public.
In context, it is no worse than ITV, and Channel Four News is a rarity on that Channel that seems not to want to compete for election night coverage or similar. Sky has done well, but all fall seriously behind the (overtly partial, but still excellent) American TV networks for coverage of poltics. BBC Parliament is a welcome addition, though seems a poor relation to C-SPAN in the US. British coverage of American politics is a disgrace - I watched the BBC for the 2006 Mid-Term elections, and no mention was made of any specific House of Representatives races, and barely a mention on the Gubernatorial contests (other than in California, for reasons I’m sure all can guess).
I don’t consider the BBC particularly biassed - at least not enough to ruin my viewing. The issue here is quality and funding, and how things have got this bad. I would like to see the license fee protected for 25 years, with a series of conditions attached -
that every programme produced and aired by the BBC should be judged to be of equal or superior quality to anything available on commercial networks, and that every programme should meet the public service requirements.
Scrap talent shows to find casts for West End shows, and stem the proliferation of soap operas that now account for so much of the schedule. Spend more on Sport and original drama, that the BBC has a track record of doing well. Fund music, and the arts instead of relying on sponsorship to pay for the orchestras. Bin BBC Three, and spend all the money on BBC Four. Invest in making all archived content available for free online. And start taking political coverage seriously.
Even on my relatively modest salary, I take significant pride in my work - I would be ashamed to have anything that I produce in the course of my employment even so much as underwhelm those for whom it was intended. Jeremy Vine, but more importantly Sue Inglish (BBC Head of Political Programming), should contemplate the disgust that has been expressed by license payers over the derisable output for which we have paid, and should seriously consider whether they are adequately qualified or capable of the well-paid jobs that they currently hold. To spend money on re-branding News 24 as BBC News is inexplicable, and the justification of expenditure on this by (and indeed, on) the sickeningly vast number of Tristrams with ambiguous and inflated titles is typical of the malaise that seems to riddle the very fabric of the Corporation.
I am a huge supporter of the BBC in principle - if I wasn’t, I would never have bothered to post my thoughts in such detail - but a new depth was plumbed this week, and something radical needs to change, and change with no little haste. From Sue Inglish (or her replacement, if I am a little behind the times) an explanation is the least that the License Fee Payers deserve, though an apology would be more appropriate, and a resignation more welcome.
Is Sky any better?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1OUXUGazHY
113 Haven’t looked in detail at next years - there will be some counties we can grow in, a couple perhaps to snatch, some new shadow unitaries to aim for but we are getting towards the peak of what is possible.
O/T BBC might be c**p at politics but just caught up yesterdays Dr Who on iPlayer (OK not HD on full screen on the 23″ Apple monitor but with the surround sound in my office pretty good) - that, plus a couple of other programmes, well worth a tenner or so a month. Would probably pay more as a subscription channel, which it will be sometime in Cameron’s second term.
108 - Actually Surrey County Council still has it’s headquarters in the London Borough of Kingston. There was thought a couple of years ago to move it to Woking, but it never happened.
110 As long as they don’t move the cricket ground
There is a lot of controversy currently about Everton FC’s plans to move from the Walton district of Liverpool to a new stadium in Kirkby which is outside the city limits, and in Knowsley, although most of the residents of Kirkby are originally from the heart of Liverpool and moved out post war. (Became a hot issue in the local elections and almost cost Labour 3 councillors in Kirkby, as they were challenged by residents groups/Evertonians. )
For those who missed ‘Ming’s Bling’ last year, here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSZbvnVfqfE&feature=related
I had forgotten how bad it actually was - it is actually worse than the cowboy sketch if you watch from 1:50 where Jeremy Vine again does a dance-along with a GCI of a golden Ming Campbell in a rapper’s tracksuit.
123. Ming’s Bling is seared eternally into my mind’s eye. I remember waking up the day after the local elections last year and actually believing I’d dreamt it.
118 - An excellent post.
I thought Kevin Spacey’s complaint about Lord Lloyd-Webber getting license fee money to plug his shows was very well aimed.
BBC SUCKS? — PRIVATIZE IT!
118 Morus
That’s far too good a post to leave languishing on the thread. Why don’t you send it, verbatim, to the BBC? You might add that the chorus of criticism from PBers was overwhelming, as they could see for themselves if they troubled to read this thread.
Typically sharp piece by Andrew Gilligan, in the Indy: on Ken, the Groaniad, and the ES:
http://tinyurl.com/69sdyn
127. Agreed, PtP.
Mike,
This http://politicalbetting.bestbetting.com/specials/politics/usa/democratic-candidate
is not working since a few days.
118 Yes, I agree with David, an excellent post but I was surprised you felt able to say that you don’t consider the BBC particularly biased - perhaps on account of your own politics, you either don’t identify such bias and/or it doesn’t concern you.
130. The BBC is quite definitely biassed, as David Roe says. I’ve known many people who have worked for the Beeb - every single one of them is liberal-left, or a kind of lapsed liberal-left.
Not a single one is, I’d say, identifiably eurosceptic, or Thatcherite, or pro-death penalty, etc etc.
Effectively, the views of 50-75% of the nation are entirely unrepresented throughout our national broadcaster. A disgrace.
The BBC must, for a start, begin to advertise its jobs in places other than the Guardian. If that fails, it must be broken up by the incoming Tory government, and only the best bits - the World Service, BBC World News, preserved for the national benefit.
Enuff already.
94,Off-topic(to footie):many,many congtrats on WBA’s protion as champs:FWIW,as you seem a sensible,well-run club,however the Prem dog-fight ends this year (WEll,lets be honest,Birmingham City are f***ed :lol:),and Reading or Fulham..take your pick!
My point is:WBA are asnsible,mature ckub who ARE capable of at leats (hopefully) finishing 1,2,3 places above the drop-zone (ie finish 15ht,16th,17th)-I’m sure you’d agree anthing else would be a bonus.
Stoke City-I offer warm congratulations,after 23 years outisde the top flight.BUT,whilst they can score,I can foresee many a team taking a can-opener to their defence.
Now to the play-offs-and Ave It 08 is gonna scream-one team ends a season better tahn they start,has achieved play-off promotion 2/3 times in the last 11 years-I refer to the boys of Selhurst Park,Crystal Palace-were I foreed to back a paly-off winner with £20 riding on it,I would have to support Crystal Palace.
Sorry,Ave It 08,no offence meant,mate,but I’m just going on recent history
NICE DEBATE…
… about the Conservative Revival in the U.K. on the very best conservative blog in the U.S.
125/127 - Thanks to you both. I’m going to send a letter tomorrow, and will be copying in the comments from this thread and from Thursday’s thread and from elsewhere in the blogosphere to hammer home the case.
126 - No Phillipe, that’s the worst thing you could do. There is absolutely a role for a high quality public service broadcaster funding the arts/political coverage that commercial broadcasters struggle to make financially viable. To lose this would be awful - but that doesn’t mean that the current situation of a proligate, amateurish commercially-aspirant BBC is acceptable.
There is no way you would get many of the BBC dramas (remember House of Cards, or The Forsyte Saga?), or the Orchestras (the Proms etc), or the modern comedy (the Office or the Thick of It) without the investment that the BBC makes - those things do not offer a good investment proposition, which is why Channel 5 is not a global houselhold name. Quality in the arts often requires a protection from the market.
The BBC should stay away from areas that are better dealt with by private broadcasters - soap operas, talent competitions, celebrity nonsense, game shows and home improvements. However, the BBC should be solely responsible for public service broadcasting, and should spend all of its money to that end. At the moment, it is acting like a second-rate cable channel, barely tipping its hat to its basic remit, and flogging the taxpayer with little given in return. That could change, but it will take brutal and courageous leadership and a true (artistic) itegrity and committment to quality. Neither are apparent in their Poltical Programming at the moment.
134 - Agreed, those who are talking about privatising or abolishing the BBC are only doing so because they perceive political bias. Why get rid of all the good things it does because of one area which needs looking at?
130 - PfP - More that the bias doesn’t trouble me. The BBC is a massive state-owned leviathan, staffed by a profession who are largely liberal-leaning, even when they work in the cut-throat corporate jungle. I get that it is naturally slightly lefty, and just accept that it is intrinsically like that. Not really my politics, but I don’t necessarily care, as long as it at least recognises that it *should* be impartial.
135 - But if it refuses to do what it needs to? Why should we pay a compulsory tax to pay for EastEnders?
Two separate themes here, as David Roe points out - alleged trivialisation and alleged bias. I think the latter is in the eye of the beholder, except in a subtle way that actulaly is the same thing as the trivialisation. The spin is “all politicians are rubbish, and only we, the cosy clique of experts, can tell you the truth”. It’s the same trick the tabloids play - don’t believe the politicians or the statistics or anything else, just buy our paper every day and you’ll be OK.
So although BBC reporters may well be privately left/liberal, they wind Labour people up just us much as they wind Tories up - because essentially they’re contemptuous of all of us with a serious interest in politics. That, in my opinion, is the real scandal.
By the way, thanks to Philippe for the link to the american politics blog - a serious, friendly technical discussion of why the polls there differ and how the votes in IN and NC will turn out. (Summary: seems to be tilting Obama’s way.)
136 - But why do they continue to recruit through the Guardian. I’m not saying a Guardian reader should be precluded from a BBC role just that they should recruit accross the spectrum.
The last person I know who got a job there was a Labour candidate in the 2005 general election.
He says that he is no longer really active because he has to be neutral. But he hasn’t suddenly stopped being himself!
137 - I don’t pay for Eastenders, I pay for the great number of things that the BBC does which I like. There are things which they do that make the things that I like possible.
Hey Mike,
You mean the BBC should spend taxpayers money on creating a five hour ‘why Obama is the best thing since sliced bread’ special?
137 - That’s fair. The license fee will be paid pro rata to the BBC by the government based on the proportion of output that is deemed to be entirely within the BBC’s remit (PSB - not soaps, not gameshows, not talent shows). If the BBC wastes half its schedule on things that belong in the commercial sphere, that money will be withheld, or given to commericial broadcasters who voluntarily do the high-quality PSB work (after having been released of their obligations).
The BBC will reform itself to return to its remit, or there will be no money to pay its staff. No other way to do it. The feckless BBC Board should be replaced, or at least asked to reapply for their positions. A complete overhaul is needed - the Tories will look vindictive if they do it when in power. This is something that the Labour government should do before it leaves office.
Morus - you have a well-founded arguement, get on the case.
138 - The election night coverage of the past few years has been insulting to just about everyone.
But your colleagues in the political parties are partly repsonsible. The ‘let me drag up the one piece of good news for my party’ tactic is risible and doesn’t help inform the average viewer any more than Jeremy Vine’s pathetic graphical games.
This goes for all parties.
I don’t know how you can change this. I rather think that you are all trained in the dark arts of spin and quite enjoy playing the game but it is not real analysis.
Labour saying this year that Tories are failing when they fail to win seats in Blackley in Manchester is the same as Tories in the mid 1990’s claiming a massive success if they managed to hold a council seat in the leafier areas of Stockport. It is not helpful to the average viewer and is naked rubbish to a political saddo like most of us.
An election night where MPs are gracious enough to each other and to the audience to add to the analysis rather than play a point scoring game would be WONDERFUL to watch. I pray for the day.
If I ever do go into elected politics, I hope I do this. I accept I will never reach government in so doing
139. Quite. The worst thing about the BBC’s bias is that these liberals are so up themselves, they think they are unbiassed. Just like the Guardian. O for the gift to see ourselves as others see us!
The answer is to force them to recruit more widely (i.e. not in the Guardian). Also allow other broadcasters to relay news with an editorial bias to match the Beeb’s (but from the right). And finally, enforce rules that make them pay attention to rival viewpoints (e.g. euroscepticism).
And if this fails: break the damn thing up. The BBC needs to be scared out of its complacency and torpor. Nothing is for ever.
Auntie Beeb needs an adrenalin pessary.
142 - I can’t disagree with any of that.
BTW, I wrote this article about the “hidden” liberal-left bias of the BBC, some two years ago or more:
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/5123,opinion,newsnights-left-wing-bias
As far as I can see, I could have written it yesterday.
141 Matthew - I’d be happier if they did a five-hour election night special on sliced bread without mentioning Obama if it would save me from the vapid detritus I saw on Thursday.
Seriously - you don’t really think this is about Mike trying to impose an agenda do you? This is about quality, and I cannot believe that even someone as contrary as your good self would defend the sheer lack of it demonstrated in the videos both in the thread and in my post at 123.
Ever the contrary view….
In defence of Jeremy Vine (but not for his election night broadcasting) - I used to listen to his phone-in show on Radio 2 a fair bit when I was living in England, and thought that he did pretty well with that. But then somehow his popularity led to his being selcted to front Panorama and now you over there are observing what you are observing. Sometimes people are taken on to do more than they should? Remember that with a programme like the Election night ones, it’s not just the presenter who decides what happens.
I have to sa