Talking of Sophie Raworth, she was doing her best to find equivalence between Starmer having a beer during a working dinner with Johnson attending a BYOB party in his garden. The BBC is a long way from leading any campaign to get rid of Johnson. Quite the opposite.All parties in power see the BBC as overly critical. It was fascinating hearing Piers Morgan review the papers this morning on Sophie Raworth’s show. Irrespective of what you think of Morgan, or his views, he was critical in a way that no BBC employee could ever be. You could sense everyone in the room gasping and holding their breath.
oopppss
It has to walk the tightrope. Had she not asked that question, which had already been posed in the newspapers, then she would have been criticised by the Conservatives of double standards and going easy on Starmer. The BBC shouldn’t be leading any campaign to oust anyone, merely reporting what has happened, though I imagine there will be consternation amongst some Conservatives about Chris Mason’s synopsis of the week. So, if it’s annoying those on the left and those on the right, perhaps it’s serving its function.Talking of Sophie Raworth, she was doing her best to find equivalence between Starmer having a beer during a working dinner with Johnson attending a BYOB party in his garden. The BBC is a long way from leading any campaign to get rid of Johnson. Quite the opposite.
The threat to the licence fee is working.
Agree with that, though the BBC outside of the U.K. is now heavily dependent on/plagued by advertising.The BBC has a dual personality.
There's the one we all admire, which produces quality programming that doesn't have to pander to advertising revenue. I remember an American friend watching Parkinson and marvelling at it, both in terms of the quality of the chat and the fact there wasn't an advertising break every five minutes. And there's stations like Radios 3, 4 and 6 Music, that also provide quality sound output.
Then there's the News side, which interprets 'balance' as two extremes and seems to prefer people shouting over each other rather than engaging in intelligent debate. And the Sports bit which admits it chases clicks and which accounts for its regular cock-sucking of the teams in red and trolling of us.
The BBC has a dual personality.
There's the one we all admire, which produces quality programming that doesn't have to pander to advertising revenue. I remember an American friend watching Parkinson and marvelling at it, both in terms of the quality of the chat and the fact there wasn't an advertising break every five minutes. And there's stations like Radios 3, 4 and 6 Music, that also provide quality sound output.
Then there's the News side, which interprets 'balance' as two extremes and seems to prefer people shouting over each other rather than engaging in intelligent debate. And the Sports bit which admits it chases clicks and which accounts for its regular cock-sucking of the teams in red and trolling of us.
Yes she had to ask the question which he answered. She didn’t need to keep asking it as the answer was perfectly satisfactory. She ignored his response on that and started asking hypothetical bollocks about the Gray report after Starmer had made it clear that its terms of reference were not to make judgments but just to spell out facts. Basically she was parroting Mail and Express talking points after he’d adequately responded to the questions.It has to walk the tightrope. Had she not asked that question, which had already been posed in the newspapers, then she would have been criticised by the Conservatives of double standards and going easy on Starmer. The BBC shouldn’t be leading any campaign to oust anyone, merely reporting what has happened, though I imagine there will be consternation amongst some Conservatives about Chris Mason’s synopsis of the week. So, if it’s annoying those on the left and those on the right, perhaps it’s serving its function.
She arguably did the same with Oliver Dowden. He played the straight bat to everything but she kept bowling the same delivery. She appears timid and looks like someone trying not to offend so as to be given the position full time.Yes she had to ask the question which he answered. She didn’t need to keep asking it as the answer was perfectly satisfactory. She ignored his response on that and started asking hypothetical bollocks about the Gray report after Starmer had made it clear that its terms of reference were not to make judgments but just to spell out facts. Basically she was parroting Mail and Express talking points after he’d adequately responded to the questions.
That's a slight exaggeration but the principle is 100% correct. I stopped listening to 5 Live about 18 months ago as I was already growing weary of their constant obsession with Brexit, then Covid. Valid news items certainly but not the 24 hours a day they seemed to devote to them.When it comes to news its recent and public shift is to say in the name of equivalence two sides of an argument will get even weighting. So you can have a scientist on answering questions on the distance to the moon - the materials it is made of and its climate - then they will give equal time weight and respect to some loon who wants to tell us the moon is only a mile away is made of green cheese and has an atmosphere because otherwise the Clangers would be dead.