The BBC is Irredeemable 117


As I get older and I see the institutions of British society twisted and distorted to fit the extreme neo-liberal agenda, I find myself advocating all kinds of responses which I would have found anathema even a decade below. One f these is that I definitely believe that the BBC should be abolished as a public funded institution, and the BBC poll tax (aka license fee) abolished.

The extent of BBC bias during the referendum campaign was breathtaking. I have worked, and specifically reported on the media, in dictatorships which had a less insidious and complete bias than the BBC has against Scottish independence. The relentless anti-Corbyn propaganda shows that the BBC exists to reinforce the neo-liberal narrative at all costs, both at home and abroad. Laura Kuenssberg achieved levels of disdain and ridicule in her report on Shadow Cabinet appointments this evening that ought to disqualify her forever from employment anywhere but Fox News. This was followed by “Reporting Scotland” and a long propaganda piece against the idea of a second referendum, replete with lies about pledges of “once in a lifetime”.

I do not think in the 21st Century we need a state broadcaster. If you want right wing propaganda, you can watch it on Murdoch, without paying a compulsory tax for it. I don’t want to watch baking, “celebrities” I have never heard of dancing, or people abseiling to win a holiday in Jamaica. If I did, I am sure I could find someone to provide it commercially.

The more worthwhile parts of the BBC’s output could be maintained or commissioned as arts spending and broadcast on commercial or internet platforms. You do not actually need a state broadcaster to have symphony orchestras and just a minute.

Even the Tories are occasionally right about something, and they are right that the BBC is a hugely bloated organisation, with 107 bureaucrats who earn over 100,000 and 23 who earn over 200,000. Forget all the ideas about reform. Just chuck the worthless bunch out on the street.


117 thoughts on “The BBC is Irredeemable

1 2 3 4
  • Jon

    Fred, watch out! Someone above has made a spoof post in your name, in which “you” accuse someone else of a “fanatical obsession with independence”.

    I’m sure you’ll agree there’s no need for ironic sock-puppetting here, but all credit to the mystery poster for some amusement.

  • YouKnowMyName

    JG nice article from Mr.Zeuss [the greater the noise – the more we should read!] if his logic is correct then also UA doesn’t want Crimea back, at least not populated. I haven’t seen this debated anywhere yet!

    as for the BBC’s role as the irredeemable state broadcaster – couldn’t we follow Greece’s example and simply shut it down tomorrow – times of austerity and all that, or is that reserved as Conz “plan B” for if the beeb actually start mentioning Corbyn’s policies without a perjorative slant?

    from ‘europe’ http://neurope.eu/article/corbyn-is-the-british-labour-party-leader/ nice, sensible coverage
    more ‘europe’ http://www.euractiv.com/sections/uk-europe/corbyn-victory-seen-boosting-brexit-camp-317598 Brexit? but it goes further

    Corbyn’s remarkable rise as evidence that British society was turning more progressive. A YouGov poll from 2013 indeed showed that some of Corbyn’s most audacious proposals, such as the re-nationalisation of railways, enjoyed strong public support.

    But while British people still endorse those policies, “it is worth remembering that they also support policies so right-wing that no mainstream politician has proposed them,” YouGov remarked. These include, for example, stopping benefits for people who refuse to accept an offer of employment.

    I don’t recall the BBC mentioning that Jeremy Corbyn’s policies have very strong public support!

    more ‘europe’ https://euobserver.com/political/130237 again positive, factual, anti-war even mentioned positively

    whilst the economist, sorry EU voice, Sorry US based Politico http://www.politico.eu/ “Corbyn risk to [UK] national security”, I think I prefer Eric Zeusse

  • David Halpin FRCS

    Agree fully Craig. I have said for c. 10 years that the BBC should be dismembered. ‘It is a greater force for evil than for good’.
    I usually cite its hourly support for the annihilation of Iraq and many of its families. A succession of the most evil psychopaths putting the ‘case’ for aggressive war – Wolfowitz, Perle, Bolton, Edelmann etc. Zio-con the broad moniker, psychopath the accurate one. John Mangold – the Beeb’s own propagandist – Sarin from a light bulb on the Tokyo tube. Simpson et al. International law NEVER raised by fawning BBC journalists.

    YouKnowMyName

    I noted the reference to the prop guide book. I made a little contribution here. Very important are the timing and the receptivity of the target minds. Of first importance work on established prejudice. Friday night a must – slumped, end of working week for the MCs, dozy with alcohol.

    Shortish and interesting/very sad in retrospect

    http://dhalpin.infoaction.org.uk/7-articles/political/46-the-blair-broadcasting-corporation

    Finally, I have suspected for a long time that public reaction to ‘events’ and political ‘initiatives’ is being measured so tail wagging dog is maximised.

  • Pete

    Totally agree Craig, sad to say, when one recalls the admirable role of the BBC throughout World War Two when millions risked imprisonment and worse for listening to BBC broadcasts.

    I finally lost all confidence in them due to their grossly biased coverage of the Syrian war, and their grovelling subservience to Israel, America, and Saudi Arabia (especially the latter).

  • Tom

    thanks youknowmyname –

    I’m trailing the EMM iPhone tool now. If nothing else it shows what we already know in terms of news being confined to nation states on the whole.

    I wonder why GCHQ bother creating the metadata controversy if they have no use for this data?
    OK I guess 99.999% goes in the bin, they just pull out stuff on a handful of suspected terrorists?

  • Ishmael

    Tom “they just pull out stuff on a handful of suspected terrorists?”

    lol, what you mean journalists and dissidents?… rhetorical

    Imo it does not matter so much, that act of doing it is an act of terrorism on the British public, by the state. Surveillance is control and coerces conformity. O1, in the totalitarian handbook.

    Is big brother actually watching you? who knows, but he could be. Panopticon stuff, ‘prism’. Could they be more obvious?

  • Ishmael

    And no they don’t just pull stuff out on people they have no particular interest in stopping. Mass collection/surveillance makes it harder to target actual people intent on harm.

  • Byron's Bear

    Get rid of BBC News. It’s completely compromised and nobody who actually watches it believes it is impartial. Get rid of the brand and donate the budget to local news orgs to fund real reporters and journos.

    But keep the cool stuff like nature programme, arts etc.

    And commision another series of The Trip with Coogan and Brydon.

    Cheers xxx

  • Ray Jinghar-Don

    Funny how the BBC manages to annoy everyone on both ends of the spectrum. With you on this one. Strange bed-fellows and all that.

  • Resident Dissident

    “You could not find a response to the article so you attacked the organ it was pubished in, the old tricks.”

    Of course the old clown would never indulge in such a practice would he?

    “Stopfake is a US funded misinformation organisation which has been shown to lie time and again. Anybody who supports it, or quotes from it, should do a personal assessment test.”

    What hypocrisy.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Mary, of course they are trained. They know exactly on which side their bread is buttered. A lot of what passes for journalism nowadays is simply PR. Most rise through through the ranks by avoiding asking the difficult questions and adopting the dominant assumptions. There are some who are likely to be in receipt of close contacts/regular information feeds from the spooks. And there are a few who may be on the spook payroll. But mostly – by far mostly – it’s the first group. Robert Fisk wrote a good book on the subject of journalism and he touches on this normative process (not necessarily new) of acculturation and kowtowing to power – I forget the title – it was autobiographical.

  • Habbbakuk (la vita e' bella!)

    I bet Mr Goss wishes he’d never changed his gravatar. The new gravatar neatly reflects his clown’s nature. But he won’t be able to change it because to do so would be an admission that the mockery of many has got to him. So it looks like he’s stuck with it.

    Poetic justice!

  • John Goss

    I repeat:

    “They cannot argue against the article by Eric Zeusse so it is all ad hominems on about Ukraine again, or some fictitious “massive build up of Russian troops along its border with the Ukraine both prior to and after its infiltration of Eastern Ukraine”. They have no argument against Kiev being responsible for the genocide. They cannot bring themselves to openly support Poroshenko. Instead they reort to the BBC and MSM long-tried and tested memes “Blame Putin” and “Blame Russia”. But in so doing they are supporting the fascists in Ukraine, even though they like to claim they are not.”

    Argue against the article you narrow-minded egits.

  • YouKnowMyName

    JG: Looks like Russia is planning to invade Sweden!

    http://neurope.eu/article/russia-warns-sweden-against-nato-membership/

    Russia’s ambassador in Stockholm, Viktor Tatarintsev, was invited to explain a statement made by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ spokeswoman that if Sweden were to join NATO there would be “consequences.” Specifically, the Russian MfA stated that Sweden was not targeted because it is neutral, but if it were to join NATO there would be “countermeasures.” Russia’s statement could backfire.

    Following the meeting, the Swedish Foreign Minister, Margot Wallstrom, stated that “we don’t think anyone should be threatening us and I have called up the Russian ambassador so we can have the chance to ask a few questions and so that they can explain themselves.” The governing Social Democratic Party in Sweden has traditionally favored a distance from the Alliance, or non-membership.

    but lets look at the numbers of Swedes who support joining OTAN/NATO

    Swedish support for NATO membership has been surging along with deteriorating relations with Moscow. In an annual poll in May 2015 that has largely driven the debate, 33% of Swedes favor joining, down from 37% in 201[4] and 45% in 2012

    That’s a surging DECREASE in SE in support for joining NATO since 2012, journalism! sheesh – I wonder if the well-read Swedish people are following the Ukraine coup in fine detail?

  • YouKnowMyName

    for some reason this next article has hi-resolution war-porn images http://neurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Russia_05.jpg

    http://neurope.eu/article/russian-military-buildup-in-syria-continues/

    Russia has issued an international NOTAM around the middle-east for this week as it prepares to fight Al’Qaida & IS/ISIS/ISIL/Da’esh

    A clear indication of the military buildup was a Russian NOTAM (Notice to Airmen) alert on Friday to Cyprus to divert civil flights off the Syrian coast; a similar warning was issued towards US forces in the region. The NOTAM extends from Monday to Wednesday (September 14-17). Russia is said to be preparing an airfield next near its naval base in Tartous.

  • Pan

    Ba’al Zevul
    14 Sep, 2015 – 8:48 am

    “Its [The BBC’s] World Service and web media have great value to the UK … in promoting our views and, yes, image abroad.”

    Could you elaborate on that? To who’s “views” and what kind of “image” are you referring?

    Thanks

  • Pan

    Tom
    14 Sep, 2015 – 9:54 am

    “@ YouKnowMyName”

    “I can’t find the Media monitoring tool you mentioned – [they all] seem to focus on social media”

    Ditto.

    Searched everywhere for “open source media monitor” and found nothing non-social media related.

    (I’m still catching up on old posts, so apologies if this has already been answered)

  • Pan

    @YouKnowMyName
    14 Sep, 2015 – 10:29 am

    “When I parenthetically talked to a very nice top spook/spookette/spookit at the ‘Home Office’ they assured me that it would be impossible for the UK to take & store everyone’s data/metadata from the internet, [and even if they did he/she/it continued – which they never had done – are not doing now and never will] then there would be no tools available with which to search and use such an enormous data-mountain.”

    You should watch this:

    The Future of Freedom – NSA Whistleblower William Binney

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3owk7vEEOvs

    (Binney is the computer genius who created “Thin Thread”. Here he explains about that, and its subsequent modification/corruption for the purposes of doing exactly what your parenthetic enquiry was about).

  • Pan

    David Halpin FRCS
    14 Sep, 2015 – 12:09 pm

    “I have suspected for a long time that public reaction to ‘events’ and political ‘initiatives’ is being measured so tail wagging dog is maximised.”

    Yes, “tail wagging dog” is all the rage these days, in so many ways.

    Watched a speech of yours on youtube. Followed up with a trip to your website. Had a good browse, then sent you a message via your website contact form. Not sure if the message got through (there was no ‘your message has been sent’ feedback from the form and I received no reply from you).

    Haven’t seen you post here before. You’re on my ‘interesting persons’ list.

  • Pan

    @Mary
    @Suhayl Saadi

    Robert Fisk – “War, Journalism and the Middle East”

    (Audio book on CD)

    A good listen (naturally, from Mr Robert).

    I spent several months reading his 1200-page “The Great War For Civilisation” once. A lot of stuff about Syria (extremely harrowing, some of it, rather like his “Pity The Nation”).

  • Pan

    Ba’al –

    My request was out of genuine curiosity about/lack of understanding of precisely what you meant.

    I’m here to learn.

    Shame, you seem to have taken it the wrong way.

  • RBHoughton

    I think the News Department of BBC should be closed and the purported reporters sent back to their real jobs. If it has to continue it should only do so through the propagandist World Service and be unavailable at home.

    The rest of the Corporation’s products – drama, adventure, entertainment, science and nature-study – should be continued. BBC photography is a world-leader

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.