UPDATE Sign this Sack Laura Keunssberg petition. It put on 16,000 signatures in the last twelve hours after gaining just 25 in its first three months!
No matter how terrible the BBC is, it constantly manages to get worse. The BBC News this evening appears like an especially rabid Tory Party broadcast. Sarah Smith was just breathtaking, while I thought Laura Kuenssberg must be the Chairman of the Conservative Party.
Sarah Smith’s report from Holyrood was so astonishingly biased that a rather bemused BBC correspondent named Keane followed it with “But after Sarah Smith’s report let’s not forget that the SNP have won an historic third election”. Sarah Smith’s contribution was a voiceover of a photo montage of Ruth Davidson. Smith told us the election was all about Independence and the “stunning” Tory result was evidence that voters were firmly rejecting the idea of any second referendum. Cut to Ruth Davidson saying the Tories were firmly rejecting any second referendum.
Let us for a moment accept Sarah Smith’s contention that the Tories attracted those voters who do not want a second referendum. The truth of the matter is that just 1 in 9 of eligible Scottish voters, voted Tory. 21% of those who voted. So the proper conclusion should be that the Tories came a distant second and most people rather fancy a second referendum. Sarah Smith’s anti-independence tirade was gobsmacking, but then it was topped by some BBC pundit comparing Ruth Davidson’s Tories to Leicester City.
A foreign visitor would have had to be watching very carefully indeed to realise that the Tories had not won, and indeed got half the votes of the SNP. So the Tories are not Leicester, they are Newcastle. Yet the Tories in Scotland got four times the coverage of the SNP on the BBC news.
And so to the rest of the UK. Laura Kuenssberg seems to have a depth of hatred for Jeremy Corbyn which is more generally reserved for Fred and Rose West. She appears to be sponsored to say “anti-Semitism” as often as possible. She opened her report by saying that the results called Corbyn’s leadership into question.
The strange thing is that the results are near identical to Ed Miliband’s 2012 result at precisely the same Council elections. The net loss of Labour councillors is 12 out of over 2000, as I write. Miliband’s result was unanimously hailed in the media at the time as a triumph. Exactly the same result for Corbyn – including winning many councils in Tory Westminster constituencies in Southern and Midlands England – is a disaster.
An opposition party should make gains in council elections. But when that opposition party makes truly spectacular gains, but is still the opposition when they cycle comes round again, you can’t expect it to make further gains exponentially. Keunssberg stated directly that Labour has to be “piling on hundreds and hundreds of net gains” to have any chance. That is simply untrue. 2012 was Miliband’s high water mark. It was all downhill from there. Corbyn is exactly matching Miliband’s best ever performance, and doing so despite being tendentiously branded a mad anti-Jewish racist by the bitter Blairites in his own party. Plus under Corbyn, unlike Brown and Miliband, the London mayor is now Labour again
Miliband went downhill from 2012 precisely because, after his 2012 successes, the BBC and corporate media threw their entire firepower at Miliband. Corbyn has already weathered an even greater media barrage than Miliband ever suffered. It is by no means plain he will follow Miliband’s downhill trajectory from here. In England next year’s local election results – in a tranche of seats last contested when Miliband was already slipping back – will tell us a great deal more.
I know everyone’s hard on the likes of Kuenssberg, et al.
But you have to remember that more than an entire generation have grown up under this neo-con bullshit, and they’ve never known anything else. It’s their little world, and to them it’s the ‘best of all worlds’, despite the fact that both society and the economy are a train crash as a direct result of the neo-con ideology.
People who have grown up since Thatcher and Reagan started it all back in the 80s are now business leaders and politicians. I know it’s now an over-used analogy, but it really is like Germany back in the 1930s.
The darlings are so propagandised that they are unable to think straight.
But Kuenssberg, with her family history (her grandfather fled the Nazis) really, really should know better.
Hmmm…I don’t think her grandfather feeling the Nazis would have necessarily made that much of a difference – whatever his background. I’m a great believer in not holding later generations of Germans to account for something that happened before they were born and therefore had no control over and not holding them to a higher standard or expecting them to take on a greater responsibility than everyone else to challenge extremism. Actually, being aware of and challenging extremism and bigotry is surely the responsibility of every one of us. Moreover, whether their antecedents participated in Nazi crimes or if they were victims of them, only those who actually lived in that period would have any real personal ‘non-abstract’ understanding of what Hitler and the war was all about. The horrors of the great depression, Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini are things that anyone of Laura Kuenssberg’s generation could not even begin to conceive. Let’s face it: I can’t and unless you’re over in your 80s or 90s I’m guessing that neither can you. There’s also the possibility that her grandfather might have been one of those conservative aristocratic Germans who were against both the Nazis and the Communists. If so, any anti-communist biases that Kuenssberg may exhibit could have just as easily come from hearing the experiences of family members who were still in Germany at the end of the war (probably likely if they didn’t happen to be Jewish) when SOME of the Soviet soldiers went on the rampage. If her family were treated cruelly or harshly by forces sent in by Stalin or they were trapped behind the iron curtain and those stories were handed down from older relatives, then it’s understandable that she might grow up in a family atmosphere suspicious and even fearful of anything to the left of NuLab.
Her grandfather was a young boy during the rise of the Nazis and he and his brother had to flee after his father, a university professor, died leaving the family vulnerable as their mother was Jewish. Her grandfather went on to have a very distinguished medical career, caring for people, obviously, so I really cannot help finding this Kuenssberg’s attitude strange. However, I do understand what you say about not holding people responsible and that we cannot imagine what others went through.
Don’t be daft, she been put there to discredit the BBC – her boss Rachel Payne is an ex-Goldman Sachs asset stripper. The job is to turn the BBC into a Tory mouth piece until they run it into the ground. The same has happened to the guardian.
Sorry, that sounded dismissive I shouldn’t have posted it – tires sorry
don’t beat yourself up, the woman is a bad example for any media student, showing everyone how not to be unbiased.
She can read, she can listen and she can look. It’s tempting to assume ignorance but this is England and its 2016. Her mouth is full of money – our money; if she cared about where it comes from, she wouldn’t take it.
Even though I pay for the bloody thing I cannot bear to watch the BBC National ‘News’.
Yes, I too was struck how much the BBC has become the spokesperson of the Tories. I turned it off as I didn’t want to hear it. It was only a description of how the situation was catastrophic for Labour and how well the Tories did.
The “News from Ten” ;O))
I’m listening to the BBC news now. I’m gobsmacked by Kuenssberg’s lengthy contribution, as I’ve been angered by Norman Smith’s similar anti-Corbyn bile all day. But how do we complain? The Today programme this morning started it off, and towards the end Nick Robinson had to concede that people on Twitter were not happy, but of course brushed that aside. (And now we’ve gone back to Kuenssberg – I’ve muted it.)
You could start by signing this
https://www.change.org/p/bbc-we-demand-producer-of-daily-politics-along-with-andrew-neil-laura-kuenssberg-be-sacked
Congratulations @SadiqKhan. You will be an outstanding Mayor of London. Your positive vision & dignity beat a campaign of fear and division.
Meanwhile an al-Nusra attack on an Aleppo refugee camp is blamed on the Syrian air-force.
I was going to question whether any attack on Aleppo occurred at all, on the basis of this Moon of Alabama report: Syria, An Airstrike That Wasn’t, but I see that “b” of Moon of Alabama does say, in an update, that an attack occurred, just not an air attack:
Lysias, there’s a massive ‘upping of the game’ in Syria since the end of the Russian intervention and elections in Syria, which voted for Assad.
I’m too tired to go against the massive propaganda machine at the moment. Suffice to say that America, Britain and France are all guilty of war crimes in this conflict, as are a number of other states.
If you haven’t seen it, here’s a little glimpse of what’s going on in Syria…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k6hSS6xBTw
Following the Russian intervention, and the elections in Syria, there’s now a massive assault on Aleppo, all carried out by western backed Islamic psychos.
And you all accuse the BBC of being a propaganda machine YCNMIU
Well said. I just wish more understood the key points in Syria.
The election results were denounced by US and UK before they were announced, and you would think that would wake folk up. The propaganda machine around Syria works well.
I’m sure Nige is suffering from indigestion after those kippers the other morning, when he shared a breakfast table with Craig. But the obvious thing to point out is that Muslims only make up 13% of the population of London. Khan’s comfortable win shows that a large majority who voted for him are non-Muslims.
For all the fascist loons, the hatred didn’t work.
It’s damaged the right wing beyond belief – no one believes your BS.
Enjoy eating your kippers tomorrow morning.
What people who live outside London can’t get their head around is that we don’t notice Muslim names – they are as common as Steve, or Phil, I know more Muhumeds than I know Phils. It’s such a non issue, when Goldsmith started going on about it people were laughing more than anything – it seemed completely out of touch with the voters.
The Evening Standard crawled up Tory arse but no Londoner takes the evening standard seriously it’s only really read by the people from Essex and Kent and that only because it’s something to read on the train.
I really couldn’t understand why he ran that campaign.
Mark. if all the Muslims dressed like Essex girls on Colchester High Street an a Saturday night for the rest of the summer, it would not require as much spiritual effort as tolerating the elders an betters of Islam backing the neo=cons in the war against Syria and closing their minds to the consequences of war on 20 million innocent Muslim refugees in this latest stage of the Islamist /neo-con war on terror..
Having said that my personal bête-noir is Muslim ladies dressed as crows, with black tighted legs strutting around under cotton flimsies.
But I have to put up with it same as Seikh-a Hehs wrapping their hair in enourmous coloured turbans.
You mentioned this week the UK military presence in Syria. I am certain we will witness many false-flag atrocities in this last push by the West to impose its Saudi nutters on Islam. No thinking person would ever join a religion that sacrificed a million lives and 20 million homeless to a nit-picking theological cause. The West underwent such a melt-down of theological fury after the invention of printing.
It led to the Enlightenment. The present propaganda-fest of reactionary parties ranging from rabid Thatcherite neo-cons to sun-worshipping sacrifice of wahhabi imams is generated by the internet, and will I hope , lead eventually to better things.
my personal bête-noir is Muslim ladies dressed as crows, with black tighted legs strutting around under cotton flimsies
Er, I don’t suppose I could borrow the polaroids, could I?
K Crosby
If by the word polaroids you are implying that I am more critical of darker skinned people than of white ones, yes.
As a new Muslim I have been criticised for wearing English clothes like trousers, speaking English, the language of shaytan, and lied to and spied on as if I was an enemy, when I am a Muslim.
I am not shy from responding to blinkered racism from places I have received it from. A community that orders small Kurdish children to wear shawal kamise Asian clothes when attending Qur’an class is locked/closed into its own culture. Then when their own daughters rebel by dressing in black tights, I find it funny to watch the old patriarchs blowing a fuse.
Mark Golding
“Congratulations @SadiqKhan. You will be an outstanding Mayor of London”
What makes you say that? Sure it’s great a working class Muslim can become mayor and all that but outstanding is going way too far.
What policy promises did he make? 50% of new housing “affordable”. “Affordable” is double speak for not at all affordable, used by those abandoning “social” rents. Yet even this will not happen. Do you know Khan is funded by property developers? Do you know he reassures the City of London through City AM that he will be “the most pro-business mayor yet”. What? More pro than Bo? God help us. Khan loves the super rich. He “welcomes the fact we have 140+ billionaires and 400,000 millionaires in London.” I bet even his mediocre transport fares promise will be abandoned. Oh, and Khan loves the garden bridge.
If the wind blows that way he is such a knob he may act all like he’s for the people but that will just be circumstantial. He is is bland professional politician branded Labour, who happened upon this job under the wings of the Corbyn phenomena. Khan is the very opposite of outstanding.
Yup. I remember how enthused we lefties were by Blair, too, and look how that turned out.
Remember: If voting changed anything, it would be illegal. And if anyone thinks anything’s going to change, just imprint the fucking hideous big business buildings polluting the London skyline on your consciousnesses. Khan may retain a soft spot for his old bus-driver dad and the estate he grew up in, but that is not going to alter his having to check every decision he is required to take with the City. He is not repeat not a class warrior. But at least he isn’t an old Etonian, I’ll give him that much.
Agreed. The media had decided on the ‘story’ long before the results came in. Kuenssberg was already sounding off against Labour this time yesterday.
How can she have the top political job at the BBC when every fool knows that elections a year after a general election have never been any guide to their prospects at the general election?
She got the job because they didn’t want someone of intellect and independent mind but someone who would parrot what she’s told – which is to conduct a smear campaign against Corbyn because he wants the same standards for Israel as everywhere else.
I can’t watch or listen to Kuennsberg without wanting to throw a hard object at my TV.
You can sign too
https://www.change.org/p/bbc-we-demand-producer-of-daily-politics-along-with-andrew-neil-laura-kuenssberg-be-sacked
I agree, Craig. The media coverage is shockingly biased. No surprise there. But it is infuriating. And then you overhear people parroting the lies they’ve heard repeated endlessly on the media. This is how propaganda works. And it does work, not all of the time, but sufficiently. One thinks of the Abraham Lincoln quote.
So now we have:
1) A likely SNP-Green Coalition, or similar agreement, governing Scotland. The Conservatives now are the Official opposition in Scotland because the Labour vote in Scotland receded. The Conservaytives in Scotland do differ to some extent from those in England. The beginnings of a Lib Dem revival in Scotland.
2) A Labour Administration governing Wales.
3) Jeremy Corbyn and Co. running the Labour Party, with the highest membership since time began.
4) A Labour Mayor of London, who happens to be Muslim.
So in what way, precisely, can this have been any kind of victory for the Conservative Party? And yet, watching the media, one would have been forgiven for thinking that thought that David Cameron had just won a third term!
[insert four-letter word of choice, follwed by an exclamation mark]
It’s actually been quite funny, watching the narrative change. First thing in the morning we have various PLP weasels on the BBC, telling us how bad Corbyn is. We also had Tom Watson ‘refusing to blame’ Corbyn for poor results. Forgive my scepticism, Tom Watson has done some good work on the child abuse scandal, but I fear he will defend Corbyn to the not-quite last, then merrily join in the burying of Caesar. So, the day thus framed, the results … end up being pretty good. Losing less than 20 seats from a very high watermark, and having a Labour Major (even a treacherous one, like Khan) would, were we not in 50’s Soviet Union, be considered a very fine result. Indeed Lab 44%, and Tories 35% is technically a landslide, if you want to get technical, and clearly the corporate media does not.
So the narrative changes to the poor results in Scotland, and how Labour should have gained 100 seats. The latter is evidently bullshit. The former, of course, is easily explainable, and not remotely connected with Corbyn, or ant-semitism, or the Trotskyite tendency; the SNP are now the dominant force, and independence is the issue of the hour in Scotland. Bluntly, I suspect many Scottish people are sick of voting Labour, and getting the same old Blair-ite clowns, and even Jezza can’t change that – and I think Jezza has a lot of support in Scotland. Milliband – as most people here saw at the time, including, with all humility, myself – screwed up badly siding with the Tories on Indy. I sympathise with Milliband, the decision may not have been his to take. It looked to me like ‘senior’ Nu Lab figures decided to side with the Tories without bothering to consult the leader, effectively bouncing him into a hopeless position. Or, it could have been a simply strategic miscalculation. Either way, it’s a hard taskmaster indeed who blames Corbyn for the rise of the SNP.
Even so, rather young looking Labour MP’s are now being interviewed, telling us they regret nominating Corbyn, and wish he would consider his position. They are entitled to their opinion. It’s just that their opinion is really stupid. It’s a good result, celebrate, and if you must shaft Corbyn, at least wait until a more appropriate moment, otherwise you just look real dumb. They have their careers to consider, and perhaps their more wily sponsors have made certain promises, but trusting a Blair-ite is a rookie move, which they will come to regret.
“Even so, rather young looking Labour MP’s are now being interviewed, telling us they regret nominating Corbyn, and wish he would consider his position.”
There is an article in the Guardian about them, comments shut down of course after the majority of blt posts told them to get behind Corbyn and stop discrediting the party. All those pro-Corbyn posts have 100s of recommendations, comments supporting the pair are have very low recommendations.
The Guardain’ s coverage of the elections pretty much followed the BBC’s .
Kuenssberg claimed on one TV report that even though Labour’s campaign was run from Scotland, Kezia had taken on some of Corbyn’s left wing policies (can’t say I noticed), and that the result should be a warning for Labour down south, because the Scots had roundly rejected those. Bit of a neo-con outlook on that one, think there were other factors at play somewhat, but seems to fits her leanings to say that only right wing policies will work in the UK. Given she’s meant to be impartial, is she simply paid by someone (outside the BBC) for those opinions? Doing that only as part of her BBC job would presumably rouse too much suspicion
Yesterday evening the BBC ran a story entitled “BBC confronts John McDonnell with Labour memo”.
See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36218546
The very wording of the news item seems to be framed to suggest there was something intrinsically dubious and disreputable about the “Labour memo” which deserved a confrontation in the public interest, but so far as I can tell the memo just turns out to be a briefing about how best to handle comparisons about results.
But I wonder however how the memo got into BBC hands?
The Blairites, having attempted to stir up the fake anti-Semitism “crisis” just before the election, hoped for and (wrongly) anticipated an electoral crash so they could launch a coup.
I presume that having McDonnell squirm on live TV with his briefing revealed was meant to be part of the fun.
“So the Tories are not Leicester, they are Newcastle.”
Ouch, and I hope the only time the Tories will be compared to Newcastle United. The pain of Newcastle’s position is already severe enough.
CM,
First, I’d like again to thank you for bringing to our attention the anti-Corbyn pro-Conservative bias that is now prevalent across much of the UK’s media output and its efforts to undermine a genuine left-of centre leader of the UK’s supposedly democratic socialist party, which under the leadership of both Blair and Brown lurched quite considerably to the right, to the extent that it was often difficult for many to fathom what space remained between it and the Tories, an issue Corbyn is trying to redress by positioning the Party firmly on the centre-left, Labour never being a ‘revolutionary’ Party, but nonetheless it advocated social change and justice mean’t to benefit all.
I don’t profess to be an expert on the Scottish political landscape, and whilst certainly I’m not opposed to Scotland going it alone, I’m still of the opinion that a Federal solution offers many positives, not only for Scots, but also for many in England and Wales, who as the latest elections reveal, are not as well disposed to the Tories as the media would like to make out, particularly given that the left-of-centre votes combined represent a solid majority opposed to the rightward trajectory of our nation state. This being positive news that many of the MSM pundits ignore.
Getting back to your central point, namely media bias, whilst many having been professing that the election of Leanne Wood – the leader of Plaid Cymru – in a once stoutly Labour supporting constituency is a disaster for Labour in its Welsh heartlands, the fact remains, but was ignored, that Ms. Wood by her own pronouncements is a socialist. Had a Tory or UKIP won that constituency I’d have had a fit, that a socialist was elected just fills me with pride. Happy to be Welsh I am.
“the fact remains, but was ignored, that Ms. Wood by her own pronouncements is a socialist.”
And so are you – but that doesn’t mean anything either.
If it has no fucking meaning, why then did the voters decide to actually vote for a professed Socialist, rather than the incumbent.
Further, and despite you half-asrsed continual snide remarks, may I draw your attention to the fact that Bernie Sanders in the USA utilises the term ‘democratic socialist’, a term once effectively banned in the USA, but seems to be making a come back – something to do with voting and sections of the electorate pissed off with neoliberalism and neocon imperialism. I’ll not even turn my attention to Trump, as all of this is meaningless to you, whatever figures presently you are spewing forth, based on the fact both the Polls and Pundits have been mostly wrong of late both sides of the Atlantic.
“The strange thing is that the results are near identical to Ed Miliband’s 2012 result at precisely the same Council elections. ”
Just not true Labour’s projected share of the UK vote was 38% in 2012 it is now 31%.
That said I don’t read too much into local mid term election results where only a low proportion of the general electorate vote – opinion polls are a much better reading of the general mood at such times.
The line the Labour leaders were following, and it came through pretty clearly on the BBC despite Craig’s protestations, was that there had been an improvement in the results since the General Election – they knew that a comparison with 2012 would not be favourable.
Know what you mean. I have a complaint to the BBC in about a report by Sarah Smith three or four weeks ago (in fact I have complained twice now – still waiting for an answer – so much for “within 10 working days”). You can find it here if you are interested https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TNoQZ0k1xw. The whole thing is quite deplorably prejudiced – I think her old man would have been less biased if he had been doing the report – but it was the end that got me, that Labour were in trouble because “people were not listening to them” (this after telling us that Labour were well to the left of the SNP) – I wasnt even watching, when it was on the first time (6.00) but turned round, expecting to see Jim Murphy in drag.
Smith is getting to be a real menace. I was in correspondence with a well known BBC journalist who assured me weeks before her appointment (as “Scotland Editor” btw) that she was a shoe-in for the job. It was part of the package to get her over from Channel 4. Her problem of course is her background, as being the daughter of the late John, she will always be suspected of favouring Labour. Of course that can often just be a matter of perception, but if she keeps going with the report you have cited and the one I have complained about, it is going to go well beyond mere perception. I suppose there might be some wisdom in “give her enough rope….”?
The BBC is dreadful – absolutely nothing about this blog’s preferred candidate in the London Mayoral elections. Well at least we now know who are really the 1%.
Actually, the fact that London – major world city – has its first black/Pakistani British/Asian British/Muslim Mayor normally would have been the major news item – normally, the London media is obsessed with London to the exclusion of much else. It’s not necessarily that we are all more blase now about such things, though of course it’s good that we are more relaxed about them. But foscussing on it would run counter to the dominant, anti-Corbynite narrative. Meanwhile, UKIP candidates are given easy rides in interviews, lots of belly laughter from those whose bellies always are full to bursting.
I long supported keeping the BBC as an “independant” source of information and news, but the rot set in over the Gulf War and has steadily become worse. The biased nature of both “reporting” and programming has become so blatant, it is bringing not only the BBC, but the whole country into disrepute! We are sliding towards a media landscape which is pure propaganda for political ideology and a one party mouthpiece which pedals nothing but opinion. The disgust I feel for the BBC is only outweighed by the shinnanigans of the government and their manipulating me into actually supporting the BBC being disbanded and privatised. Like the NHS, British Rail, Royal Mail and all the other public bodies, the BBC is just another hapless victim of political intrigue and interference. Set up as great British institutions to serve the country, they have been and continue ot be dismantled to serve a handful of banks and oligarchs. THIS ASSET STRIPPING QUICK-BUCK-FOR-MYSELF-&-THE-MATES, SELF-SERVING MOBSTER POLITICAL MENTALITY HAS TO STOP! That includes the bloody Blairites who should leave Labour and let Jeremy Corbyn get on with the job of saving something from the mess he will be ultimately left to deal with. And it will be one poisoned chalice. How will Britain ever survive having been raped and pillaged by twenty years of the grasping thieving swine?
Spot on and very well put
Excellent post Janet.
Janet Kaiser, your a’ Kaiser’ indeed, well spoken. I feel the same, the britsh society and its institutions are raped and pillaged, one only has to look at the NHS, bad results in schools due to education being the moral football of numpty politicians, the utter lack of mental health care to those who need it desperately, the usurpation of the financial system by the Corp. of London, and much more.
Hello from Australia. Just to let you know I was reading this morning’s edition of the Murdoch flagship paper, The Australian. One article had the banner: Conservatives destroy Corbyanites in Scotland (or words to that effect). I thought how unusual that the Tories would win in Scotland until about halfway through the story it became apparent that the SNP had handily won the election. Made me laugh this evening when I sat down and read your blog. Thought I’d share.
It seems that despite the Labour members overwhelmingly choosing Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the party there is a Blairite faction which wants to oust him in order to create a second Tory party which they think will be more electable.
In spite of the right wing BBC and the Tory dirty tricks campaign combined with his own party members sniping at his leadership l think Jeremy Corbyn has faired remarkably well in these elections.
The country needs a Government which actually cares about it’s people and doesn’t condemn them to permanent austerity and an undergunded NHS.
Stephen Allport
So refreshing to read something I entirely agree with written so well. I just wish I could write like that.
I belive in Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell and intend to do what ever I can to help the cause, my only worry is that we cannot get the message out there whilst the mainstream media including the BBC carry on like they do.
“A rather bemused BBC correspondent named Keane followed it with ‘But after Sarah Smith’s report let’s not forget that the SNP have won an historic third term'”
It will be interesting Craig, to watch carefully the subsequent trajectory of correspondent Keane’s career!
I have written to complain to the BBC about its blatant bias against Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party and its determination not to mention the Tory electoral fraud scandal. I received a reply that was entirely unapologetic and peppered with references to moments of air time in which the scandal was mentioned, but I have seen absolutely nothing, and can only assume that the moments were so fleeting that I missed all of them when my attention was briefly diverted by a noise off.
Whilst I don’t know enough about Keunssberg’s private politics to arrive at the ‘conscious Corbyn sabotage’ conclusion (though perfectly plausible), what I find deeply objectionable is the BBC’s total suspension of any critical judgement when it comes to reproducing the Tory narrative or rather making its ‘objective’ reporting reflect the Tory/New Labour way of weighting/framing certain issues. An objective news report would tell us how certain localities voted, what the demographics of the vote were, how the demographics have changed etc. and then draw electoral conclusions from that, setting these against partisan interpretations – rather than taking those interpretations (‘test for Corbyn’) as their premise!
Disgusting journalism …
~~~~~It is by no means plain he will follow Miliband’s downhill trajectory from here.~~~~~
If not by the corp-0-rat media and the fascists in Liarbour, it will be Corbyn’s historic role to find one.
Sick and now weary of this right wing media mess called the BBC. Their business is so tilted and askewed right that it is no longer amusing , but shameful. Seems OK to them because the dafties will not notice, and be able to do fuck all about it anyway.Watch this space.!
If the CoE was previously the Tory Party at prayer, the BBC has become the Tory party on air.
I don’t think they realise at the BBC and other corporate meejah that they are now fighting the British people.
So true I can add nothing but to so “Well said!”