Peter Lloyd: Time for the White House to nuke Broadcasting House?

Donald Trump’s openly stated war on parts of the mainstream media couldn’t be better understood and justified than by listening to BBC radio news broadcasting its intense war against him, and his administration, over the public airwaves noted here and here on TCW.

For me, the BBC’s new low, in terms of impartiality and sober reporting, was Friday 24th February’s Radio Four’s World at One (WATO). Now WATO claims to be “45 minutes of news, analysis and comment” with the comment mostly from independent sources, and has been a highly regarded, serious programme on which many UK politicians are reasonably happy to appear. It also gets contributions from a decent number of high profile international economists, politicians and academic experts.

But when it comes to discussing recent US politics and the new President of the USA, if  the Trump piece in this episode is anything to go by, the programme resorts to  pure stand-up comedy - of the insulting kind - typical of the BBC's comedy panel shows.

The fact it was on a news programme simply confirmed that the BBC thinks Donald Trump is a bad joke. A staged setting for their commentary is, well, just fine and appropriate, and puts the correspondent centre stage in the way of a stand-up comedian, as the star of the show.

The report was authored and delivered from Washington by Jonny Dymond, one of the BBC’s correspondents. The language he used was aggressive and pejorative. There will be “a shift in the way illegal immigrants will be rounded up and thrown out of the country,” he said. That Trump’s new policy in the USA isn't really new at all but having the law as it stands properly applied, Dymond chose to ignore.

Instead he then played a clip of the President speaking in public and saying...”quiet, quiet, quiet”... in a very soft voice which Dymond tried to influence BBC listeners by shouting at them “GOT THE MESSAGE?  SHUT UP”  - as his take on what Trump meant but which was clearly not the same thing at all -  Trump implied no such thing in asking for quiet.

The next incisive comment from our dispassionate and measured Mr  Dymond was.... “He [Trump] went to Florida, much of which he owns....” No he doesn’t. That’s fake news.  Dymond then cleverly invited the listening audience to join him in his disgust at President Trump saying... “You may sneer at the President’s garbled rhetoric….”.

How is that news, analysis or fair comment from the BBC in a flagship serious news programme?

Trump may well have failed to be sufficiently specific when he said  that something bad happened in Sweden the night before in the speech we were played clips of, but Dymond’s attempt at defamation by shouting at us (the listeners)....“Nothing ever happens in Sweden - it’s SWEDEN - but why let the facts get in the way of a great Presidency ....” was patently untrue as he and any number of his colleagues should know.

There are, and have been, many serious incidents involving immigrant communities and the public authorities and tension is, unfortunately, running very high in places as Fraser Nelson details here.

So Dymond’s attempt to skewer Trump by fixating on a relatively minor error gave him the chance to make out that Trump was wrong about the immigrant problems in Sweden, which he wasn’t. It was pure character assassination by the BBC, authored by its very own Jonny Dymond.

His report, which was one of a series describing Trump’s first 100 days in office obviously caused great amusement back in the studio. WATO's presenter Shaun Ley was giggling as it finished, confirming it as the insulting comedy piece it seemed set up to be.

How can the BBC allow and approve of such a sarcastic comic rant substituting for news analysis or comment in one of its flagship, serious BBC news programmes? The first answer is, of course,  that it does so because it can. It’s easy, and all the BBC people surrounding Jonny Dymond and WATO loved it and believe the same thing. It is clear that they too think Donald Trump, his administration and the ideas behind them are dreadful.

The second answer is that there is no true accountability process at the BBC which would force the corporation to justify what it does in a case like this of editorial bias. They know that they can get away with it.

The BBC talks to itself (but often not others) with great respect and admiration through staged fawning and unchallenging interviews with its own correspondents, and takes what its correspondents say as read. It congratulates itself, and believes that all it does news-wise is tremendously good.

It’s not difficult to see how self-worship on this scale leads to mickey-taking  against anybody, even the new President of the world’s most powerful democracy yet to have  time to implement his policies. All are fair game for the BBC.

As long as the two criteria of the BBC having its own view and of not being truly accountable remain, then it will continue. But it’s become worse than that. The fact that a flagship news programme included a blatantly one-sided comic rant from one of its own correspondents shows that the BBC is getting more confident in its ability to flout impartiality, knowing that it will not be brought to book.

A simple complaint to the BBC would, in this instance, bear no hope of any admission of bias or wrongdoing, let alone of soliciting an apology or change of direction. The BBC can never admit it has its own view which infuses everything it does and creates its own sense of right and wrong. It couldn’t see how condemning Trump could be anything other than what civilised people would do, because he’s beyond the pale.

In this instance the BBC did what the BBC is very good at and loves to do, and that is skewering people it disagrees with. But let’s be absolutely clear, what it delivered in that piece is not news, analysis or serious independent comment. It’s propaganda, and war propaganda at that.

(Image: Diego Cambiaso)

Peter Lloyd

  • TmWe

    Laugh they might, but the joke is on them – Donald Trump is still president of the USA and we will be leaving the European Union. So satisfying.

    • TheStoneMan

      I just hope we do leave!

      • TheRightToArmBears

        Not if Shareeza has anything to do with it.

    • Michael Wood

      We won’t be leaving the EU in my opinion, even after, and if Article 50 letter is written.
      In the next two year negotiating period there will be serious civil disturbances in Europe ( and possibly in Britain, too). This will be used as an excuse to keep us in. You can imagine the Government saying ” in these times of trouble we must stick with and help our friends in Europe”
      Not enough attention is being paid to the migrant situation!

  • Colkitto03

    The BBC ‘news’ is now constant editorialising.
    A great example this week was regarding the U-turn this week on National insurance payments. Laura Kuenssberg was almost gleeful. The BBC spent its first 11 minutes on the six o’clock news on this story.
    Laura used the words ’embarrassing’ and humiliating’ to describe the activity of the chancellor. Standard stuff for the BBC when attacking the Tories.
    The problem in using words such as embarrasing or humiliating, is that is not the BBCs responsibility to say. They can get an opposition MP on to give these opinions. Because opinions are what they are.
    They use the exact same inflammatory language when ‘reporting’ Trump

    • Tad Stone

      LauraK is a joke. So biased. Even when she makes an attempt at balance it fails.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      Yes, the female babbling on Five alive today kept referring to Trump’s paranoia about the MSM and ascribing whatever he did to his hatred of it.
      The BBC wears its agenda on its sleeve.

    • Groan

      Yes even in that report I remember thinking that: a. there actually hadn’t been time for anyone to even be outraged etc. and b. Could the media interest be because all the top reporters etc. are self employed themselves in these “management companies etc. so they can get paid more . Seemed remarkably self interested as there were in fact some much more wide ranging changes that got passed over.

    • Bik Byro

      And yet – if you look at the weird leftie site “the canary” (yes, I usually try not to, either) – you will find raft upon raft of articles angrily claiming that Laura Kuenssberg is biased towards the conservatives.
      https://www.thecanary.co/topics/laura-kuenssberg/

      • Colkitto03

        We know its not biased towards the conservatives, but it certainly is biased against Corbyn. The BBC is a liberal centre left organisation that is rooted in Blaiite philosophy. They have always despised the far left.
        Where the Canary get it badly wrong is that they mistake BBC antipathy for Corbyn as support for the Conservatives.

    • Paul Robson

      Just heard this with respect to Osborne and his 97 jobs. And it’s actually a fair point as to whether he can do all that an be an MP. But apparently completely forgetting the large number of Labour MPs who neither know nor care where their constituencies are or what they think, which is one of the reasons for their destruction in Scotland.

    • ReefKnot

      Yes but curiously they never use the words ’embarrassing ‘ or ‘humiliating’ when referring to Jeremy Corbyn. Why the he11 not ? He is more deserving of them.

  • John Lewis

    The Conservative party had the opportunity and the unquestionable suthority to rein in the BBC via the charter renewal at the end of 2016. They blew it so we are stuck with the status quo for the next 10 years.

    • Lamia

      Cameron wanted the BBC’s support for Remain in the EU Referendum, so he tried to bribe it. It was another completely pointless bit of negotiation because the BBC was going to support Remain come what may. Cameron’s fear that the BBC would use the issue to poke holes in the Tory government was deluded. Dave and George were heroes of the metropolitan left, right and centre at the time. Last spring and summer any Pro-Remain politician or celeb was beloved of the BBC, the Guardian, the Times, the FT et al.

      The BBC was steadily biased towards Remain in the run up to the Referendum, though rather more circumspect in its tone and language than afterwards (I think this s because it complacently presumed Remain would win and felt it was just helpfully nudging the public towards this), since when it has simply been in emotional and mental breakdown.

      • Paul Robson

        I don’t know, I thought it wasn’t too bad in the referendum tbh. Though the cynic in me agrees with you ; they thought it was no contest. It has been jaw dropping since. Exception , again, Andrew Neill.

        • Lamia

          The BBC was more reasonable in its tone before the actual vote, but it also stacked the coverage, giving far more airtime to supporters of Remain. It was holding back a bit, but there was a definite structural bias.

          Since then it’s been panic, incomprehension, brittle anger, despondency. I can hardly listen to the BBC on my radio alarm anymore because since June 24th the presenters sound like they are about to throw themselves or someone else off a high ledge.

          I don’t much care who the Americans elected (personally I thought both candidates were rubbish) but when Trump was elected I felt dread simply because I know the BBC would get even more frantic and outraged. It’s like watching someone having an unending tantrum. For a few seconds it’s shocking, then it becomes disquieting, then irritating, and eventually it becomes both extremely irritating, extremely boring and somewhat surreal. You end up thinking, “How long can they keep this up?” I get the sense that they feel that if they keep doing this, day in day out, for actual years (maybe decades?), the other side will finally, wearily, give in.

          • Mike Fowle

            It’s also giving undue importance to claims for another Scottish referendum.

          • Lamia

            Like the rest of the London media, the BBC is clueless about Scotland and Scottish politics. Most of its staff know the place only as somewhere that they once visited for the Edinburgh Festival. 95% of the time they patronisingly ignore it. then, when they are out of other options, they will treat a speech made in Scotland, particularly by Sturgeon, as of earth-shattering importance.

            They were very worried about Scotland possibly leaving the UK in 2017, because the metropolitan establishment as a whole didn’t want it. At other times they play with the idea of bigging up Scottish nationalism. Today they are desperate for anyone they can depict as presenting an obstacle to Brexit and the ‘fanatic’ Theresa May. They don’t know and don’t care that Sturgeon is a mediocre politician who can’t even stop a rat infestation in her own constituency. So for the moment they are doing shamelessly partial PR for her.

            When Sturgeon finally comes a cropper in Scotland, the BBC’s experts in London will shake their heads sagely and ‘inform’ their audience that actually she was crap.

          • Lamia wrote, without a hint of irony:

            Like the rest of the London media, the BBC is clueless about Scotland and Scottish politics.

            Even the BBC’s Andrew Neil and Andrew Marr? What about Kirsty Wark? What about Laura Kuenssberg? What about all the other Scotch faces and voices, and those behind the scenes, at the BBC?

            The BBC is rotten with Jock and each and every one of them is focused on his, or her, homeland.

    • Then again, I read that a Parliament may not bind another Parliament, which I happen to think is part of your problem, but let that go, for now). But can a Parliament change its mind? Revoke the charter and be done with it.

  • Frank

    Nuke may be a bit strong, but a complete ban on all BBC staff and their families from entering the USA for any reason seems entirely justified.
    Trump should also ban Karen Bradley (the Culture Secretary), her family and all the members of the OFCOM Content Board and their families.

    • 00Le_Gin00

      Hmmm…the fall out would be a problem…but as a starting point it seems quite reasonable that they may eventually decide on a BunkerBuster?

      • Frank

        Perhaps two or three to be certain!

  • Morris Jasper

    … Congratulations on the best clickbait title I’ve seen in a long while.

  • MrVeryAngry

    I just cannot listen to the BBC news any more.

  • David Keighley

    The Jonny Dimond pieces (which are running weekly on Fridays on WATO ) mark a new low in the BBC’s approach to news, though John Sopel’s nightly homilies on the BBC1 bulletins are not far behind. All pretence of balanced journalism has been thrown out of the window.

  • SteadyOn

    The BBC will continue to march along tooting its own trumpet right up until the moment it lands at the bottom of the cliff.

  • When the so called “scoop” about Trump’s tax returns hit the airwaves the BBC went full metal outrage and it was headlined on their news website. But when it was pointed out that the “scoop” showed that he had actually paid a substantial amount in tax and the tv network was mocked for building up a non event the whole thing went down the BBC memory hole.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      They repeated Rachel Maddow’s diatribe about Trump’s 2005 tax return again on the 1.00pm Radio4 news today. Their US correspondent called Diamond went through the full BBC agenda items to denigrate Trump.

  • TheRightToArmBears

    The BBC deserves nuking after it repeated a Mock the Week episode a few weeks ago in which an alleged comedienne, Tiff Stevenson, said that Trump’s mother should have been punished for not having an abortion.
    The first showing was early last year before he was a candidate, the second when he was President.
    The BBC has to go. I hope the White House knows of this insult which the May government obviously collides with and approves of.

    • Paul Robson

      That’s astonishing, hadn’t heard it.

      It’s also not remotely funny. My reaction would be to repeat the “joke” but insert Obama’s name in there instead, or Mandela for example.

      • TheRightToArmBears

        This is an e-mail that I sent to a friend –

        A comedienne, employed and beloved by the BBC, Tiff Stevenson, said on an alleged comedy TV programme called ‘Mock The Week’, first shown on BBCTV in June 2016 and repeated on 25th January on BBCTV2, that Trump’s mother should have been punished for not having had an abortion. She proudly displays her prejudices at 18.00 in this link, which may or may not be available outside the UK – http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/e… Since I am resident in the UK perhaps someone in the USA might care to inform the President’s security and press offices of the latent hatred the BBC harbours towards the US government.

        That link no longer works, so the BBC know what they have done and have deleted it. If anyone can resurrect it and provide a link to it then perhaps we may get some hubris eating away at Broadcasting House.

  • Tad Stone

    Dymond isn’t a serious journalist. Never has been. Like Mr Very Angry I don’t listen or watch BBC’s on any political subject. There is absolutely no balance. Now they are pro-SNP.

    If there is an organisation that is the Enemy of the People it is the BBC.

    • Paul Robson

      I think that Andrew Neill is impartial (or as the BBC would have it, a right wing extremist). I think he personally leans to the right, but he doesn’t take rubbish from anyone, left or right, remainer or leaver.

      The rest are laughable. Typical question “to what degree is Trump/May/Leaver total sh*t”.

  • Groan

    On a practical note Nuking Broadcasting house will not get them all by any means. They’ve moved in big style to new quarters at Salford Quays bringing a whole new population of “smug” . Oops I shouldn’t pass that on to the Donald. I live nearby.

    • Labour_is_bunk

      Salford Quays – isn’t there some sort of Gay Village nearby?

      • CRSM

        ‘Gay’ is the correct description for a troupe of monkeys in a well-stocked banana tree. Not for a bunch of ageing pervs.

  • Claphamomnibusbloke

    We should destroy the BBC ourselves. As Tad says below they are the enemy of the people of these islands and of free speech. Fully paid up agents of Brussels. Heads on spikes outside Broadcasting House.

    • Tethys
  • donbob

    It would be great to see the CIA investigating BBC executives and so-called journalists and making public via one source or another their vast wealth, property empires, nepotism, and sexual peccadillos. Decapitate the organisation one scandal at a time.

    • Labour_is_bunk

      Yes, those peccadillos are so cute when they roll up into a ball.

      (The old ones are the best).

      ….after all, the bias is so depressing you must have a bit of levity.

  • Lamia

    It couldn’t see how condemning Trump could be anything other than what civilised people would do, because he’s beyond the pale.

    This is the core of the problem. The BBC and its defenders are quite aware, if you press them on it, that in a boringly technical sense it is incredibly biased, but they have a stronger feeling that this is justified because… well, it’s justified.

    You cannot get them beyond that. They can’t process this simple argument: “you may personally like or dislike this or that person or institution but you should not let your personal likes or dislikes make you treat it in different language and according to different standards. It’s against your own stated code.”

    The BBC has always had a moralising element, but there was at least a time (well, during WW2 at least) when the moralising tone from Broadcasting House very broadly reflected the outlook of the nation as a whole. There was no great jarring against class or regional boundaries, and in any case the language was much more neutral and restrained. Today it reflects only, and quite forcefully, the broad moral and political outlook of a section of the professional/upper middle classes, and mostly within the M25. When people take issue with its biased stances, it tends to think they are either insane, stupid or downright bad. Then it tells us and itself again how respected and impartial it is.

    • Colkitto03

      Great post,
      For an organisation which worships diversity it has an incredible lack of diversity when it comes to staff living outside the M25. Yes, staff may have been born around the country but they have made their careers among the metropolitan bien pensants. It is the epitome of London bubble group think.

      • John C

        N1 group-think.

        • TheRightToArmBears

          More accurately NW1 – Highgate and Hampstead, the most expensive and non-black residential areas of North London.

    • Paul Robson

      There was a classic example on the Now Show which sums the BBC up ; the joke was about Brexit leavers and the court cases ; something like “they were so keen on parliamentary sovereignty, what happened to that ?”

      And it’s actually fair enough. It’s fair comment.

      The problem is, there’s a flip joke (that the remainers are all of a sudden keen on parliamentary sovereignty, not decisions being made in Europe) that never appears.

      • Lamia

        I think you are being a little generous. They were playing dumb (or perhaps genuinely confused about) about the fact that Parliaments do not have any ‘sovereign’ say about the result of a properly-held referendum. Once they chose to put the decision in the hands of the people, that was it. They have to abide by it, just as they have to abide by the result of a properly-held General Election or a jury decision in a court case.

        But you are right about the sudden infatuation with ‘Parliamentary Sovereignty’ by those who for decades were engaged in handing it over, lock, stock and barrel, to Brussels.

        • John C

          Well, it’s a mixture of ignorance and hubris.

    • John C

      Mostly with the Boroughs of Islington, Haringey and Hackney.

  • phil

    “Time for the White House to nuke Broadcasting House”?
    I’m surprised the viewers forced to pay for the crap the BBC churns out have not already stormed it in the fashion of the Bastille and then demolished it brick by brick.
    Dear Mr Trump,
    Do us, the long suffering British public, a favour and at least consider it because our politicians have not got the guts to close this appalling biased organisation down.

    • Paul Robson

      Dear President Trump.
      If you boycott the BBC on your visit there will be much wailing going on, but a large proportion of the population will agree with you , and not only those who might support you or your politics.

  • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    Well, Mr. Trump may not be able to nuke the BBC, but he’s doing what he can to strike a blow against the concept of a “state broadcaster”– the spokesman for the budget announced yesterday, in a presser that had hands being involuntarily and immediately raised to necks to clutch pearls, that the Trump Administration would seek to zero out appropriations to NPR and PBS, the radio and TV wings respectively of Federally-funded-in-part “non-commercial” broadcasting, which are essentially-“BBC-Lite”-type organisations in their political editorial orientation. Because of corporate sponsorships and ”[tax-deductible] donations from viewers like you,” the Federal funding is not exactly critical, but just the threat of eliminating it has Lefties all in a tizzy.

    • Best part of his proposal, that and zeroing out NEA and NEH. Oh, and down 30% at EPA, as well. The guy we hired as CEO of America, Inc. is working out pretty well.

  • choccycobnobs

    “How can the BBC allow and approve of such a sarcastic comic rant substituting for news analysis”.
    That’s easy. They are paid by the taxpayer either through the licence fee or through our EU ‘brokers’. They can afford to stick two fingers up to the British people. We need a new Treason Act.

  • idon’tneednodoctor

    The BBC is rotten through and through.

    • CRSM

      But it is very effective indeed in its insidious propaganda.

    • nouveaulite

      GCHQ aiding Obama to spy on Trump must have been too much for the Donald to take.

      • Don’t really know what Trump thought of it. But my take is that the request should never have been made, but once it was…Well, the five of us share almost everything, and that makes it better for all of us. So GCHQ was correct to comply, absent guidance from HMG.

  • The Third Man

    I need to re-write your headline to “Time for the White House to nuke Broadcasting House NOW”

  • Weygand

    As the national broadcaster the BBC has a duty to present reports in an objective and impartial manner. This is not simply for the benefit of its licence fee payers but because it is the official representative of the nation.
    By treating the US President with contempt day in day out, the BBC has reduced its own influence with the new administration to zero but must be in danger of undermining that of the British government as well.
    The likes of Sopel and Keunssberg and the smug comedy double act of 100 days need to be reminded of their professional responsibilities, otherwise, never mind its independence, senior heads should roll.

    • 300 Spartans

      Preferably literally. On Tower Green.

      • Labour_is_bunk

        Should be Tower Hill, really.

        Tower Green was reserved for royalty and nobility.

        • 300 Spartans

          That’s true. A regrettable moment of weakness led me into generosity there and afford them that privacy.
          In through Traitors Gate and up to the Hill.
          Short of that, I’m very happy to settle for the abolition of the licence tax.

          • TheRightToArmBears

            Abolish it yourself by not paying it.

    • Labour_is_bunk

      Just seen an advert for the Dave channel (Freeview) which does its darnedest to ridicule President Trump, so it’s not quite a BBC disease, although the constant one-sidedness is still unacceptable.

      • Andypara

        Dave/UKTV is owned by the BBC!

        • Labour_is_bunk

          I see. Thanks for dropping the scales from my eyes.

          Perhaps someone should be pointing out they shouldn’t be “owning” Freeview channels, next time they bleat about lack of money.

  • Colonel Mustard

    BBC is beginning to broadcast a singularity of crass political dogma, whether it’s in (so-called) comedy, drama, news or even classical music on the radio. It stinks of an orchestrated approach and of directives from a central propaganda department and is rammed down viewers and listeners throats ad nauseum. The upper echelons are stuffed full of “Labour people” and there are revolving doors between the corporation and the party so hardly surprising. Just very tedious and long overdue for fumigating.

    • John C

      Beginning???
      It’s been Pravda for decades.

      • TheRightToArmBears

        The BBC learned which way the wind was blowing when Heath told them to sack Jack di Manio in 1971 because he was against us joining the EEC.

        • John C

          Ah yes, that ghastly POS Heath.
          Should have been hanged as a traitor.

      • Colonel Mustard

        It has become much more blatant recently with the political propaganda now being shoehorned relentlessly into every drama. Since about the time Purnell became its Director of Strategy in 2013. He was already a beneficiary of the revolving door between the BBC and the Labour party as he was Head of Corporate Planning for the BBC at age 22 after working for Blair as a PPE wonk researcher.

        • John C

          Yes, you are right – even into Radio 3 music programmes.

    • Alan Llandrindod Wells

      The Conservative party in parliament is stuffed with “Labour People

      Cameron and Osborne are Blairites.
      No wonder they gave them the new charter.

  • Can of Worms

    I’m ashamed of the BBC.
    It’s not just its domestic output, but it is also relied upon all over the world to be “Impartial” through the BBC World Service.
    If you ever listen to R4 after the station has gone to bed where it relays the World Service output, the lefty bias becomes even more evident.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      Go to http://www.bbctvlicence.com and discover how to avoid, not evade, the TV tax.

    • CRSM

      As something of an insomniac, I often wake up around 2 am, and at that hour R4 is relaying the world service. 20 years ago, the WS had an interesting and genuinely diverse range of programmes. But now it’s all about how hard done by Africa is. I’m fed up to the back teeth with it.

  • seac

    PLEASE DO !! Anything to get rid of LK, and the oh so right on Al Beeb.

    We may even get TMS back to how it should be

  • DavidT

    If the BBC was a newspaper, I could just stop buying it. There a several newspapers with party lines I do not like, so do not buy. The BBC is different. The television tax means that I must pay for the BBC whatever I think of it. There should be some sort of news opt out.

  • Bill Quango MP

    On LBC’s Saturday phone in, I think it was Matt Frei who was condemning Trump’s media stance. He had banned the BBC from a press conference.
    A caller said that in a way the administration was justified by the hostility and ridicule that BBC news gives the President. The caller said almost every day the BBc was anti-Trump.

    Matt Frei asked for evidence. The caller pointed out that just that day on the BBC’s main world news website was an article “Did Trump win because his name was first on the ballot paper?”

    Poor, liberal, but fair, Matt had to concede that such a ridiculous story should not be on the news pages. And that it would not have appeared during the Obama presidency.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      Shows how much of a journalist Matt Frei is. When did he last don his mackintosh and trilby with notebook and pencil head off into the night after a story?
      Newsrooms now exist to receive ‘reports’ by charidees, think-tanks and policy-study groups, all funded by government subsidies and staffed by graduates who turn out to be the children of politicians.
      Everything on the BBC and other news distributors is what ‘they’ want you to hear.
      I look to Breibart and comments here and on Guido Fawkes.

      • TJB

        The lobby journalists really get offended when you call them stenographers. It’s well worth trying on places like Twitter, very rarely fails to get a waspish response.

  • Snoffle Gronch

    At the outset of the Presidential Election campaign, Mr Trump announced his intention to restrict visitors from certain middle eastern countries because of the security situation. The affronted BBC “journalist” covering the story ranted that this was “unacceptable”. I waited for him to explain to whom. The American public at large? Democrats? Bush-supporting Republicans? None of the above. It was simply “unacceptable”. Evidently to the BBC.

    And that’s not untypical of the BBC’s practically worthless news coverage. I twice complained about their coverage of the Canadian General Election, which was nothing more than witless flag waving for the ineffectual hand-wringing bedwetting effeminate who is now the Canadian Premier. According to the bot at the BBC, their coverage was entirely balanced.

    I have given up paying the Licence Tax. I routinely have to switch off news broadcasts on the radio within minutes. It’s a source of permanent disgrace to Mrs May’s Government that they didn’t sort this crew of freeloading public sector parasites when they had the chance.

    • 300 Spartans

      Resounding post!
      You can’t see me, but I’m standing up applauding!

    • Tethys

      He actually said ‘all’

      • Snoffle Gronch

        You are stupid. Israel is in the Middle East.

        • TheRightToArmBears

          As far as we are concerned Israel is in the Near East which covers Gibraltar to Aden.
          The Middle East covers Aden to Singapore and the Far East is everything from there to the Americas.

  • Tethys

    Trump assassinates his own character almost daily, no help required.

    • Badger

      I wish we had Trump running Brexit. We’d have been out six months ago.

      • Tethys

        He seems to have a gift for the idiotic.

        • ratcatcher11

          What does that say about Hilary and the Left Libs running the Democrats these days?

          • Tethys

            …is it that they can make141 characters?

    • Benthic

      Yet he is US president.

      • Tethys

        Yeah, strange isn’t it – but I guess you can fool some of the people all of the time.
        In this case that’s just 28%

        • Benthic

          28% piffle – the voting system was specifically designed in this manner to balance States Rights (as independent countries) against population size within the States. Have you even noticed that there are two Senators per State while Members of the House of Representatives are allocated by relative population size?

          • Tethys

            Ah, I see; a progressive Federation of individual member states retaining individual laws & local administrations to suit their own situation, yet overlaid with further laws passed by elected officials for the greater common good to create an economic, and military powerhouse.
            Sounds like a good idea, maybe we ought to…….hey, wait a minute!

          • John C

            Tethys [sic] is an ignorant git. Just block it.

          • Benthic

            Excellent advice thanks John.

    • ratcatcher11

      But he was elected President of the United states in a biased, black propaganda environment run by the Liberal left, including the BBC. Yet he still won. Says more about the US electorate and a lot about the rubbish BBC.

  • Badger

    I’d like to see the so-called BBC mock some prominent figures in islam. God knows there are plenty of legitimate targets, but they won’t because they are craven cowards, terrified that a car bomb will be driven into Broadcasting House atrium.

    Come to think of it, maybe that wouldn’t be so awful after all…

    • Uusikaupunki

      No chance…..

      “In a wide-ranging interview about faith and broadcasting, Mr Thompson disclosed that producers were faced with the possibilities of “violent threats” instead of normal complaints if they broadcast certain types of satire. He suggested other faiths had “very close identity with ethnic minorities” and as a result were covered in a more careful way by broadcasters. “Without question, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms’, is different from, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms and I am loading my AK47 as I write’,” he said. “This definitely raises the stakes.”

      Daily telegraph 27/02/12

      • I’m sure his predecessors from 1939-1945 are very proud that he complains.

        Probably true though, judging by what happens to those brave enough to write/speak about it.

  • cmp679

    When I’m driving I play a game – turn on R4 and see if the programme is about racism, sexism or ‘homophobia’. 80% it’s one of those. Sometimes it’s a royal flush.

    They see their role as balancing out bigotry so the supposed ‘far right’ sleeping monster isn’t roused and so since Trump/Brexit they’re doing a lot more ‘balancing’, For them the BBC’s actual remit is just less important than pushing their LibLeft narrative.

    • itdarestospeak

      I play the same game watching BBC breakfast news whilst eating my toast – every day it’ll be a constant diet of
      a) how brilliant or hard done by women are
      b) how wonderful or hard done by Muslims are
      c) how awful Brexit is
      with occasional climate change scaremongering and Trump – hate thrown into the mix
      It’s like clockwork

    • John C

      Actually, the BBC is one of the main sources of bigotry in the UK. This has infected even Radio 3.

      • CRSM

        Especially its dreary ‘drama’.

  • Benthic

    During the election in the US one of the interesting leaks was an email from the BBC to Podestra asking for an interview. The email described Jon Sopel saying he was Tony Blair’s biographer and a good friend of Blairs.

    But then you just for to look at the BBC and see their association with the Labour Party.

  • 300 Spartans

    So, “there will be a shift in the way illegal immigrants will be rounded up and thrown out of the country”.
    Well, fancy!
    Dymond, you said it yourself, they are illegal, which means they have broken the law, you smug Trotskyite al BBCra git.

  • ratcatcher11

    Obama is probably one of the most amoral corrupt Presidents in American history, with a whole host of allegations building up against him and his administration, yet according to El Beeb he walks on water. They are as corrupt as he is.

  • Ozfan

    The BBC has no accountability, this is the problem. A Charter for 11 years is longer than 2 Parliaments! And even if the Charter were shorter, the Government’s ability to manage this monster is limited, as we have recently seen.

    How did we ever get this unaccountable monster created? The BBC really needs to be held democratically accountable via our MPs. Or abolished.

    Without any accountability, the BBC is, unsurprisingly, biased, self-serving and wasteful.

    Of course, “the BBC” is a group of people. Who is it that has set the clear anti-Brexit, anti-Trump, left-liberal policy line? Is it a maniac Tony Hall (he managed to shoehorn the word “Nadia” multiple times into an interview today) or … and this is where the lack of accountability becomes most concerning … is this highly political stance set by an unelected clique?

    • Ozfan wrote:

      How did we ever get this unaccountable monster created?

      A small group of wireless manufacturers needed a reason for the better off to buy their products, in the 1920s, but the cost of providing the reason exceeded the income obtained from selling the products (the licence fee went to the GPO, not the BBC) and the directors of the company the manufacturers formed learned very quickly that the profits from the sale of wireless sets were never going to be sufficient to pay for the reason. Various interests, mostly political and bureaucratic, saw that there was a considerable political and bureaucratic dividend to be gained from saving the shareholders from losing their dividends so the privately owned and underfunded British Broadcasting Company Ltd became the ‘who owns it’ British Broadcasting Corporation and has never wanted funds.

      It’s a little more complicated than that but the minutes of the meetings were lost or buried long ago and so no one can ever know the details but, in essence, that’s the story.

      • Tethys

        Standard practice…
        Similar tale as to why Diesel engines don’t run on peanut oil, Trains don’t use the linear induction motor, and the US Electric car industry was set back 20 years.
        Oh, and also why renewable energy faces such an uphill battle.
        And yet, despite it’s faults, the BBC is way more than a news outlet, it does a good job on the whole, there are plenty of alternatives for those with a certain perspective who crave positive reinforcement.

        • Burkeian

          Your examples seem very remote and irrelevant to the meat of this discussion – i.e. the BBC,s use of its own opinion and biased outlook as the source of its selected and slanted ‘ news’ output. Due to the colossal impost on TV viewers handed over to the BBC it is able to swamp the airwaves with its opinions on TV, radio and online.. It is miss-information on a staggering and dangerous scale. Rather like the sidelining by all political parties of the issue of leaving the EU for so long, there is no politician or party to represent the widespread view of the people that the BBC is over -powerful and should be totally reformed. We need a referendum to decide the matter !

          • Tethys

            Interesting though innit?
            Also I can think of at least 6 alternative terrestrial TV news outlets if you prefer.

          • None of which, I daresay, are supported by a forced imposition, such as a licence fee. In fact, if you watch any of them, you are forced to support BBC. Now run along, little boy, the adults are talking.

          • Tethys

            It’s a tax, and the removal of public funding would be the removal of a public service.
            There are only so many Vampire or Zombie series a teen can take.
            (and the same goes for Rupert Murdoch)

          • John C

            Der Pravda Corporation is a profoundly corrupt, continuously lying, entirely biased cesspit.
            Block the moron Tethys [sic] – I have.

    • John C

      It’s also maniacally anti-Israel. It is not ‘liberal’: it is the exact opposite. It is a spittle-flecked sewer.

  • Don’t watch, don’t listen, don’t pay, it’s the only way to deal with the BBC, you know it makes sense.

  • franknowzad

    A state controlled monopoly of information is abomination and should be defunded.
    But every government finds it very convenient to be able to brainwash sheep

  • John C

    The BBC’s behaviour is unlawful. It is in breach of its Charter every single day. It is a disgrace, an abomination.

  • Choam Nomski

    This is precisely why the BBC should no longer be ‘the state broadcaster’ and funded by the licence fee. If it wants to sneer at politicians from other countries, in the same way Sky does, it should disconnect from the state and be funded by voluntary subscription.

  • Tethys

    TCW really needs to rethink its strapline policy-which is anything but conservative & responsible.
    Every instance such as this one ratchets up the tense mindset of the impressionable ie Thomas Mair by one tiny increment.
    Unless of course the intention is to woo the Breitbart loons.

    • EllenO

      Oh please. What you have said is just nonsense. You mean thinking the Beeb is doing propaganda is somehow playing into the Breitbart audience. You are just playing fast a loose with facts.

      The BBC does have a relentlessly leftist slant. The BBC does distort the news either through juxtaposition of omission. The BBC does lack accountability to the objective truth. The BBC is infuriatingly self regarding.

      You do not need to be a slavish follower of Breitbart to find these Beeb traits unacceptable especially we are funding the institution.

      • Tethys

        No, I’m really talking about the language and imagery of headlines/straplines such as ‘Nuke Broadcasting House’ …irrespective of the ensuing article, though some might think that such clickbait attempts to compensate for a lack of depth and substance.

      • John C

        The BBC is a profoundly corrupt, continuously lying, entirely biased cesspit.
        Block the moron Tethys [sic] – I have.

        • James60498 .

          In this case I agree with Tethys.

          Nuking it is unnecessarily over the top.

          A well placed conventional bomb or two should do the trick nicely with far less collateral damage.

  • paul parmenter

    The first signs I noticed of the Beeb going downhill came many years ago, when it became apparent that they were placing more emphasis on how they were presenting events, than on the actual events. In other words, they were more interested in themselves than in what they were supposed to be reporting on. It was as if their first instinct, on seeing somebody bleeding to death, was to get a good picture and have it broadcast, rather than trying to help. And then congratulating themselves on getting a scoop ahead of everyone else.

    It has continued like that ever since. The organisation has grown more complacent, more arrogant, more self-satisfied. It is now firmly in the business of making its own news and promoting its own views, without showing the slightest sign of recognising its own shortcomings or even entertaining the possibility that it could have any shortcomings.

    • John C

      I first noticed that they were pushing one-sided propaganda – not so much the presentation, as you discuss above, but more the content itself, which is relentlessly biased – when they adopted the Arab propaganda against Israel in 1982, during the first Lebanon war, as though it were holy writ, and did so with obvious sneering contempt towards Israel. It’s been getting worse and worse since then.

  • PendaBrittaniX

    Was it Thomas Jefferson who said,”To compel a man to furnish funds for the propogation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”

  • I’m not convinced that someone as flagrantly and obsessively biased as The Con Woman should be adjudicating on anybody else.

    • Labour_is_bunk

      At least it wears its bias on its sleeve, unlike the Guardian, which is supposed to be “independent”.
      In my student days, we had an economics lecturer who would rather swear black was blue than admitting the Guardian was biased leftwards.

  • Richie P

    I remember BBC bulletins from the 60s and 70s in which readers and serious correspondents at least gave the impression that they were endeavouring to give little other than ascertainable facts unsullied by overt opinion, or worse, wild speculation – and largely based on things that had actually happened in the last 24 hours (as opposed to frequent general [politically sensitive] surveys of the state of the NHS, the plight of immigrants, some report sponsored by a pressure group etc.). Now they are reduced to using buffoons like Dymond (and believe me, the report referred to here was by no means an aberration) for whom such an approach to journalism is quite alien. I honestly expect to hear the ‘entry of the clowns’ music when he does his ten-minute turn from Washington – for a turn is effectively what it is – accompanied by comedy special effects when a clip of Trump is used. I fear recent editions of WATO (shouldn’t that correctly be TWATO? – I’m pretty sure it used to be THE World at One) might soon represent the last vestiges of any contact I have with BBC R4.

  • AnusRodendum

    Ever since the BBC (headquartered in the country where the CoE is the de facto state church) appointed a Muslima as the head of their religious affairs programs we should have absolutely no illusions about where Broadcasting House stands in terms of its allegiance.

  • The_Mocking_Turtle

    Fox News in America is one of the most disgraceful and dishonest broadcasting networks on earth, e.g., Fox claimed that there were no go Muslim areas in the UK (preposterous lie) and that GCHQ had tapped Trump’s phone lines at the behest of Barack Obama (total and utter lie), and yet Donald Trump apparently takes what it says as received wisdom hence the mind boggling nonsense he spewed recently, semi-literately, about Obama using security forces to surveil him before his election.

    The BBC is considered to be the high water mark internationally as far as journalistic standards are concerned and, as far as I know, does not influence our Prime Minister as far as information and policy go. Personally I think it is a far worse situation when a President of the United states lacks the good sense and discrimination not to believe things that he sees/hears on media as debased and distorting as Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News and state things as facts based on information received casually from such polluted sources as if they were proven truths rather than complete and utter lies.

    Fox News is an unworthy news network and Donald Trump an unworthy President.

    I would take the BBC’s word over either or both of them any day.