THE BBC: Why it is Britain’s Tsipras, and why it needs a Troika

bullied BBC

Better a half-blind victim of bullying than a Blue Sky

It’s the last day of the year, and the BBCNews channel has been looking back over it during the last few days. It did so from the viewpoint of a nursery teacher of Special Needs kids. It’s cringeworthy, patronising and generally depressing stuff. But the cause of it isn’t hard to discern.
Well, hah – I say that, but for the activist Beleeeverrrs out there, it’s all about disgusting bias….Leftie pc, and toadying to the Towrees. If you can follow that, which personally I can’t.

 
My view is infinitely more simple. Since Greg Dyke left, the BBC has been scared and gutless, but with odd flashes of estuary pc poking through the fog every now and again. You and I may not like it, but it’s neverthelss a very good reflection of Big Britain out there. In Reithian terms, it should be more than that, but it could be much worse.

The BBC is not, however, a bowl of bland custard for three year-olds because of institutional inanity. It’s like that because it has been continously bullied, threatened, punished, and criticised for 35 years by a herd of politicians and money men like Margaret Thatcher, Alistair Campbell, Tony Blair, Jeremy Hunt, Peter Mandelson, David Cameron, Theresa May, Michael Fallon, Michael Gove, Ed Miliband, Lord Ashcroft, Nigel Farage, Lord McAlpine, George Osborne, and all the activists in the UKip, Labour and Conservative Parties.
Now the views of this pirate crew are disparate and often antithetical, but they do all have two things in common: they all believe that the Beeb is biased against them, and they all approve of Rupert Murdoch.
Now clearly the BBC can’t be biased against the entire spectrum of British politics, but the other I think more likely extrapolation is that Auntie neither likes nor trusts any of the buggers. If the Corporation does hold that Weltanschauung, then clearly their discernment is firing on all cylinders, and it is thus A Good Thing.
The main thing the BBC as an employer isn’t is Newscorp. For that absence alone I could forgive them almost anything, but it can’t end there. The inspiration and education dimensions have gone, erased by external and internal forces who are and always will be the big buyers of white paint. For the BBC also has its beleeeveers – Andrew Marr is one for sure, as are Dara O Briain and the late(ish) Jeremy Clarkson – and they are all very clearly biased. Further, the last two years of incessant attack on ‘perversion’ in BBC history were blatantly fomented and then orchestrated by a loose group stretching from Brooks to McAlpine via Number Ten and on into Rupert’s three love-triplets Gove, Hunt and Johnson.
Positively, what I’m arguing is that the BBC’s problem is a growing demand for the BBC to do exactly what all the politicians, trade unionists, occupiers and corporacrats want.

 
The BBC has become Britain’s Alexis Tsipras, and what it needs is a Troika.
This would be mine: Jeremy Paxman running news, Ian Hislop running entertainment, with Andrew Neill in charge of political investigation and depoliticised education.
They’d need an equally fearless Chairman to keep their aggregate egos in check, and for that there can only be one option – the reinstallation of Greg Dyke, alongside the abolition of the Governors.

Yesterday at The Slog: Sacred cows and Sacred Facts

27 thoughts on “THE BBC: Why it is Britain’s Tsipras, and why it needs a Troika

  1. The most obvious failure of the BBC is in its reporting of the World News ,in which it is very selective and propagandist. The most pernicious form of propaganda is that of non-reporting of events.
    The BBC is culpable in this respect,and has lost its credibility to a once worldwide audience.
    Its correspondents and reporters are obviously under orders during interviews to toe the Govt line.
    The task of holding power to account no longer applies if you wish to advance up the greasy career slope at the BBC.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. a very topical article JW. of those you mention it was alistair campbell who publicly swore to finish the BBC after its apparent bias up to the iraq fiasco. since then the poor dears have truly had their balls cut off… but please pretty please no newcorp. that would be the pits like a privatized NHS or prison service or police force.. and education.. all of which they are giving the same treatment too.

    Like

  3. John Hear Hear to what you say.
    The main thing the BBC is good at when it’s at its best is being antiestablishment.
    But their current weak, weak leadership and pathgetically restructured governorship is hopeless in the face of bullying by spinsters like Cambell, Thatcher, Hunt and Manglebum and the continuious threat of screwing its funding and selling off “proiftable” elements to Murdoch and his political allies.
    Not sure about Greg Dyke but your choices for other positions are definitely worth thinking about though I’d prefer Ian Hislop in charge of of political investigation.

    Like

  4. Agree wholeheartedly with your recommendations for the new BBC Troika; could I also recommend Jeremy Clarkson as Neill’s 2IC in charge of Diversity and Cultural Enrichment?

    By the way, that poor sod in the photo: reminds me of a lively encounter many years ago with a few chaps from the Legion Etrangere in Union Street, Plymouth. Two days before I could see anything at all …

    Like

  5. Not Greg “hideously white” Dyke, surely?

    I personally wouldnt describe the BBC as left wing, Id describe it as liberal: both socially and economically. But liberal in the hard sense as in that which is not ‘liberal’ is verboten rather than a different opinion.

    Like

  6. The BBC needs a good clean sweep, God forbid the Turd should get his grubby mitts on it but, the current shower needs to be shown the door and some new blood introduced. They are far too generous with the taxpayers money at present, there needs to be more accountability and far smaller salaries, the likes of Yentob, earning two salaries for effectively one job was outrageous and typical of the way they hand out money to themselves. I could go on. It has to stop.

    Like

  7. @SL

    Couldn’t agree more about BBC reporting of foreign events. Whether because of bullying by politicians, or as a result of the gentle guiding hands of strategically placed MI6 agents of influence, BBC coverage of anything threatening the narrative of ‘bringing freedom and democracy’ is appalling. Without the interwebs, most of us would be unaware of the reality in Ukraine and Syria. The BBC has be effectively neutered and is a propaganda tool of the foul forces that direct foreign policy in the West. I recently read ‘Why are We the Good Guys?’ by David Cromwell. It is clear that BBC complicity in the crimes of British foreign policy has been the norm for decades. The Gilligan incident was a golden nugget in a sea of turds. The official stories as pushed by the entire MSM including the BBC during such events as the ouster of Sukarno and the massacre of indigenous Indonesians by Suharto in Indonesia, the campaign against the Mau-Mau in Kenya etc. were almost entirely fictional, and whitewashed unconscionable support of torture and murder. When the truth of such events emerges thirty years later through official documents, the public has moved on but the damage has been done.

    I grew up loving and trusting the BBC, but I now believe this was due to a naive ignorance on my part. I still adore programmes such as ‘In Our Time’, on Radio 4, and the high quality comedies that the BBC produce, but BBC news is now so captured that it is only useful as a guide to the thinking of the enemy.

    The above is not to suggest that Turdoch’s stable, or any other of the excrescences that pass as organs of the MSM are any better, and in fact most are far worse, but the role of the BBC and Guardian as ‘Gatekeepers’ of acceptable opinion is becoming obvious to those interested enough to delve deeper into world events.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Much of the radio budget today goes on third party pre recorded productions, but the savings here are wasted elsewhere.
    The treasures of decades of content have not been recognised, and as a result have been pirated beyond recovery in many places. This surely is one important commercial lack of acumen that s typifies state industries with easy income.

    Like

  9. What Salford Lad and Canexpat, say also applies to Swedish news reporting. Russia is never mentioned in reports on Syria. There was a brief report on the Christmas news that Syria’s Assad Government would be present at the negotiations, but no mention of Russia’s part in this.

    I think since then Obama has swung again and so the situation is unresolved. But who knows?

    Like

  10. I must admit to a personal interest here, having worked in the BBC and others (as a basement level techie). BUt I think the BBC is an idea that we should strive to keep. We can’t allow the current problems with the news reporting make a case for throwing it all away. Despite claims, there is actual hard evidence aout teh right wing bias of BBC news reporting, to a sickening extent at times. But if we allow that to be destroyed and not amended, then we will be much poorer, and Turdoch all the merrier, most especially because that’s what Cameron & Turdoch want. It used to be that the settlement on the licence fee was beset by political interference, but it is fairly recently that it has been allowed to interfere with the output all the time. Like many other things being flogged off from “Honest” Ozzy’s market stall, if we let the BBC, ORdinance Survey, Land Registry and everything else go, we will be unable to recover even a little of what used to make the UK recognisable. The BBC is also suffering from the same affliction that has seen less diversity and barriers to non-PLU (middle class, certain schools & unis) backgrounds that is stifling the entire country, and reflects the wider malaise of massive inequality.

    Like

  11. Greg Dyke won’t be allowed back as he committed the heinous sin of kicking out McKinsey and Company, as he thought he got better value for money from his blog commenters than paying millions for a bunch of stuffed shirts. It was determined upon high that Mckinsey aren’t allowed to be fired, ever, so he was fired and McKinsey came back in with the next DG.

    Mckinsey and Company also work for Sky and hence have what is proverbially known in the consultancy game as a ‘conflict of interest’. No doubt they have triangulated to find a justification, but I think you can see the deadhand of Mckinsey’s preferred client (if they had to choose) being Sky.

    So if you want Greg Dyke back, you need politicians who aren’t controlled by Mckinsey and Goldman Sachs, Murdoch and Capitol Hill.

    Like

  12. The problem is one we have had before. This is another Cold War situation, the first being in the 1950s. It is for this reason that I hope Sweden will keep out of NATO and not be panicked into abandoning Swedish Neutrality that has lasted for 200 years. So I understand the need to preserve as much as possible of what is good about the society that is passing, as “Florence” argues.

    Like

  13. @Florence

    Agree entirely. I would love to see excellent state institutions protected from the venal predations of the private sector. This includes the BBC.

    I am all in favour of a publically owned broadcasting behemoth, but such an organisation should be bound to strive for ‘honest’ reporting. Individuals within the BBC should be held to account if there is evidence that a subject was suppressed or editorial independence was compromised on behalf of outside interests. I would be the first to admit that I do not have a solution to implementing this. At present, the BBC effectively acts as an establishment mouthpiece. I have many friends that do not count anything as having really happened unless the BBC reports it.

    FWIW I don’t see the BBC as right wing, so much as pro-establishment, whoever the establishment happens to be at the time. As evidence, I submit the coverage of UKIP and Farage during the last election. The recent treatment of Corbyn and the multiple censoring of Craig Murray by ‘higher powers’ within the Beeb shows that upper management serve the interests of the elite, not any concept of the truth or plurality in debate. As JW points out, this timidity in the face of establishment pressures has worsened beyond measure since the ‘sexing up’ controversy.

    Like

  14. All irrelevant in the scheme of things really….
    ‘The Muslim population of Britain surpassed 3.5 million in 2015 to become around 5.5% of the overall population of 64 million, according to figures extrapolated from a recent study on the growth of the Muslim population in Europe. In real terms, Britain has the third-largest Muslim population in the European Union, after France, then Germany.’

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-31/islamization-britain-sex-crimes-jihadimania-protection-tax

    Like

  15. I’d agree that it used to be an exemplary showcase for Britain, respected by much of the world, up until the rot started sometime late eighties/early nineties. But ………
    Given the anti-EU feelings of many on this blog, which I share, I’m very surprised by the mixed, I’d venture to suggest “mixed-up” views here on the BBC’s political bias. Part-funded for years by the EU itself, it has clearly shown not just a bias but a strong promotion of everything EU, questioning no aspect of its management or direction. Indeed, this was admitted to me in a letter by the then political editor over 10 years ago, The BBC even held an internal investigation into its own bias, producing an affirmative result, which they refused to make public. IMHO anyone suggesting “hideously-white” Greg Dyke was not a traitor to British culture at the time and that the BBC is not the spoken arm of The Guardian, needs their brains examined. Not only pro-EU, but anti-Israel (with one of its regular ME journalists married to a Palestinian (no conflict of interest there!) and 100% promotion of catastrophic man-made global warming, all point to an unequivocal left-wing bias. (Question Time being a good example, by its selection of audiences and panel members to promote a “certain view”).

    As for what passes for comedy today ………..PLEASE! It gets less humorous by the day.

    Like

  16. Thought for the day. Some unique features of the UK. 1.The BBC, funded by a tax, making it immune to market forces. 2.The NHS, a virtual monopoly, funded by taxation,immune to market forces. 3. The House of Lords, immune to the wishes of the electorate. 4. The Honours system, the plaything of politicians.

    Like

  17. I would employ a Yank and let him recruit his own team, goes by the name of Denninger, doesn’t do stupid, doesn’t do idiocy, doesn’t do pandering, and doesn’t do political correctness.

    What he does do is facts and logic.

    He’ll never get the job.

    Like

  18. If you want to see what value system the BBC adopted you need to understand why it is that Jeremy Clarkson was fired. They’d been after his scalp for years as he represented what they hated. Top Gear was it is now realised a show about three good mates larking around in old bangers (many of their best films were indeed made in old wrecks not the latest snazzy motors). It was the warm banter and fun which kept me hooked not the cars, a mistake this ginger bloke has surely made in his attempt to usurp the TG crown.

    There is a classic pisstake JC made of the BBC where he drives a mini car into the BBC and into a meeting with a dwarf, a feminist and other minorities blahhing about inclusion. That sums it up finely.

    Happy New Year everyone!

    Like

  19. Canexpat – It appears we have been listening to two different broadcasters. I’m not familiar with the new BBC Director (I’m an expat myself) but it’s early days and his credentials remain to be demonstrated. However, the article you referenced in Global Research (itself a well-known and prolific anti-Israel source) was written by a Stephen Lendman, a self-described “retired small businessman now devoting all his time working with progressive organizations”. “Progressive” being the salient trendy word, and reflecting the very mindset of the BBC itself, which many believe blinds it to seeing any dissenting viewpoints. You seem to infer Mr. Lendman’s views are NOT biased or one-sided and one should accept them as factual on the matter??!

    Like

  20. @alexei

    You describe Global Research as a ‘well-known anti-Israel source’. Well known by whom? Most of the articles that I have read there have been extremely well referenced. Perhaps the atrocious behaviour of the ‘state’ of Israel over the past 60 years would lead any honest reporting of Israel’s actions to be slandered as ‘anti-Israel’. It is usually the case that any article that is even slightly critical of the ‘Jewish state’ is slammed as ‘anti-semitic by the Israel-firster/Hasbara crowd. I referenced this particular one from Lendman partly because he describes himself as Jewish and therefore somewhat insulated from the ‘anti-semite’ canard. I notice that rather than address the points made in the article, you concentrate on the publisher of the article (Global Research) and attempt the obvious ad-hominem by focusing on the ‘Progressive’ description in his brief autobiography. Perhaps his own definition of ‘Progressive’ is rather different from the usual knee-jerk Zerohedge epithet thrown at anyone not sufficiently orthodox in their Libertarian principles. I found his article illuminating because rather than just alleging bias with no evidence, he has itemised the loaded language used by the BBC in its reports.

    Finally, I find it interesting that a single reporter having a Palestinian girlfriend is enough to call into question the independence of the reporter, the fact that at least one (and I don’t doubt more than one), BBC executive is an avowed Zionist is not enough to question the impartiality of the organisation.

    For all that. Happy New Year.

    Like

  21. As others have commented, it’s interesting how perceptions of the BBC vary so much. Personally, I reached a tipping point some years back where I cannot bring myself to watch the news content. They clearly are a mouthpiece of the establishment and, apart from extremely isolated glimmers of integrity, have never adhered consistently to their alleged reason for being and certainly now are shamelessly into the Ministry of Truth approach. I can’t bring myself to join the surreal circus by turning the box on and allowing the content to assault my senses.
    Political control of the content is just so symptomatic of the wider fascist/corporate control agenda within the UK. The fact we have to fund the garbage adds to the irony. I can’t see any hope of a decent broadcasting service until the wider issues within our ‘democracy’ are resolved.

    Like

  22. @Jane
    I have the same attitute to the increasingly obvious BBC gatekeeping and outright propaganda. Remove the news and the BBC can be superb at times, especially BBC Radio. The problem is how to retain the baby, while disposing of the bath water.

    Like

  23. BBC Radio is the only thing I find worthwhile. It has too many fingers in too many pies. Its commercial activities should preclude it from receiving a license fee. If not, then sell off all the commercial branches. Having been acquainted with a few BBC employees I have as much respect for it as I do the political class.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s