BBC bias again?

I see the recent stooshie that Alex Massie tried to whip up about Salmond's comments on Charles Kennedy didn't real catch on - I was half expecting the BBC would run with it...

On the BBC: I stopped paying the license a while ago. More because it's mostly patronising guff. I think they certainly went into bat for the No side - quite clearly. I think though, it's because they are rooted in the very fabric of the status quo that independence would fundamentally change.

I do have to laugh when people on either side moan about newspapers not being impartial. They're editorially driven and unless they carry an Op-Ed like the NY Times does, then neutrality doesn't come into it.

That said Salmond should have kept his opinion to himself and offered his condolences rather than using Charles Kennedy's death to get on his soapbox. To be honest I am sick of Salmond and his desperate need to be in the limelight.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berwickhibby

That said Salmond should have kept his opinion to himself and offered his condolences rather than using Charles Kennedy's death to get on his soapbox. To be honest I am sick of Salmond and his desperate need to be in the limelight.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

---

Really?

This is what he tweeted on June 2nd

"Charles Kennedy was by far the most generous person I've ever met in politics. Sad loss of a great politician, and above all, a great man".

Can't see much wrong with that.:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

Really?

This is what he tweeted on June 2nd

"Charles Kennedy was by far the most generous person I've ever met in politics. Sad loss of a great politician, and above all, a great man".

Can't see much wrong with that.:confused:

---

I read his comments because a colleague was all in a fluster about them - I honestly cannot see what the problem was. I think though, if the Yes side can dish it out about people like Brown, Darling and Murphy, they should be able to take it when the flak comes the other way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

Really?

This is what he tweeted on June 2nd

"Charles Kennedy was by far the most generous person I've ever met in politics. Sad loss of a great politician, and above all, a great man".

Can't see much wrong with that.:confused:

---

What he tweeted and what he was quoted in the papers as saying to a journo are rather different things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

Really?

This is what he tweeted on June 2nd

"Charles Kennedy was by far the most generous person I've ever met in politics. Sad loss of a great politician, and above all, a great man".

Can't see much wrong with that.:confused:

---

i think he may have said more than just that, something along the lines of CK being a reluctant member of the No campaign.

As I understand it, Salmond was asked a question about this. He gave a measured and respectful answer, imo.

Still, he is the bogeyman and he does turn people off the SNP.

His public profile will diminish, just as it did during election campaign, but opponents will continue to use him to frighten people.

I'm not sure I explained my view very eloquently, but I hope you get my meaning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lyonhibs

What he tweeted and what he was quoted in the papers as saying to a journo are rather different things.

---

I know, and some may think that going to his words by his own hand are better than listening to some hack who when challenged about his piece on Salmond's comments then says he might have been OTT. Mr Massie shot from the hip without thinking, and has now apologised.

Massie's tweet...Happy that Alex Salmond has clarified his remarks re Charlie Kennedy. Happy to concede too that, given this, my piece on him yesterday was OTT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibs Class

i think he may have said more than just that, something along the lines of CK being a reluctant member of the No campaign.

---

He did. He responded to a question about Kennedy and Better Together, and said that his heart really wasn't in it, not that he was some rabid Nationalist. He said he was a Federalist and was a great politician and a great man who'll be sadly missed.

Kennedy himself had said that Better Together wasn't doing a great job, and he'd rather they were more positive.

Salmond is the bogeyman who'll be used by the MSM to strike fear into some people, others just don't buy papers anymore.

There's a new one today about him calling Anna Soubry a Woman. Cue faux outrage.

I have a major problem with Salmond and his rhetoric, his constant need to bang on about another referendum is infuriating. Scotland held a referendum last year and the majority voted NO!!! Now do what you were elected to do by the people of Gordon and represent your constitutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berwickhibby

I have a major problem with Salmond and his rhetoric, his constant need to bang on about another referendum is infuriating. Scotland held a referendum last year and the majority voted NO!!! Now do what you were elected to do by the people of Gordon and represent your constitutes.

---

As is your right. He's not the only one banging on about another referendum though.

I just think his comments were used by Massie (who's now apologised) to score a petty point on the back of a great politician.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-33009579

Why are they reporting this as savings when they are obviously cuts in budgets?

Sorry, I have not seen the words sorry or apology in any of Alex Massie's tweets. Is this the SNP interpretation of the attached tweet.

Happy that @AlexSalmond has clarified his remarks re Charlie Kennedy. Happy to concede too that, given this, my piece on him y'day was OTT.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geo_1875

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-33009579

Why are they reporting this as savings when they are obviously cuts in budgets?

---

Did you see the word "cut" in both the main title and the 1st line in the body of the article?? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

I know, and some may think that going to his words by his own hand are better than listening to some hack who when challenged about his piece on Salmond's comments then says he might have been OTT. Mr Massie shot from the hip without thinking, and has now apologised.

Massie's tweet...Happy that Alex Salmond has clarified his remarks re Charlie Kennedy. Happy to concede too that, given this, my piece on him yesterday was OTT.




He did. He responded to a question about Kennedy and Better Together, and said that his heart really wasn't in it, not that he was some rabid Nationalist. He said he was a Federalist and was a great politician and a great man who'll be sadly missed.

Kennedy himself had said that Better Together wasn't doing a great job, and he'd rather they were more positive.

Salmond is the bogeyman who'll be used by the MSM to strike fear into some people, others just don't buy papers anymore.

There's a new one today about him calling Anna Soubry a Woman. Cue faux outrage.

---

Fair enough, it was a poorly timed question but to be fair Salmond could have just said "today is not the day to be discussing Charles' views on the Independence debate" or similar, which would have been a slightly more appropriate answer than a personal opinion that CK heart wasn't in the BT campaign.

Anyway, I can't claim to be unbiased re: Alex Salmond as he irritates me in a way that NS does not (I voted SNP in this past election for what it's worth)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lyonhibs

Fair enough, it was a poorly timed question but to be fair Salmond could have just said "today is not the day to be discussing Charles' views on the Independence debate" or similar, which would have been a slightly more appropriate answer than a personal opinion that CK heart wasn't in the BT campaign.

Anyway, I can't claim to be unbiased re: Alex Salmond as he irritates me in a way that NS does not (I voted SNP in this past election for what it's worth)

---

My thoughts exactly, a great response which I could not have put any better

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lyonhibs

Did you see the word "cut" in both the main title and the 1st line in the body of the article?? :confused:

---

I did but both the headline and body refer to Osborne making savings. He is not making savings he is making cuts in already agreed budgets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lyonhibs

Fair enough, it was a poorly timed question but to be fair Salmond could have just said "today is not the day to be discussing Charles' views on the Independence debate" or similar, which would have been a slightly more appropriate answer than a personal opinion that CK heart wasn't in the BT campaign.

Anyway, I can't claim to be unbiased re: Alex Salmond as he irritates me in a way that NS does not (I voted SNP in this past election for what it's worth)

---

:agree:

I just wish some would see it for what it was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berwickhibby

Sorry, I have not seen the words sorry or apology in any of Alex Massie's tweets. Is this the SNP interpretation of the attached tweet.

Happy that @AlexSalmond has clarified his remarks re Charlie Kennedy. Happy to concede too that, given this, my piece on him y'day was OTT.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

---

:dunno:about the SNP, you'd have to ask them for the fishul position if you're minded to.

FWIW the hack has conceded that his piece on Salmond was OTT. At least he had the balls say that, if indeed as you point out the word sorry or apologise wasn't in the tweet.

Have a nice day:aok:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geo_1875

I did but both the headline and body refer to Osborne making savings. He is not making savings he is making cuts in already agreed budgets.

---

It's a question of perspective. A reduction in spending is a saving to the person doing the spending, but a cut to the person receiving it. I don't think the wording is anything to get upset over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berwickhibby

I have a major problem with Salmond and his rhetoric, his constant need to bang on about another referendum is infuriating. Scotland held a referendum last year and the majority voted NO!!! Now do what you were elected to do by the people of Gordon and represent your constitutes.

---

Did you see and hear the other parties election campaigns?!! :faf::faf::faf::faf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikey09

Did you see and hear the other parties election campaigns?!! :faf::faf::faf::faf:

---

Exactly! The biggest 'banger onner' was Willie Rennie. It was all he had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

It's a question of perspective. A reduction in spending is a saving to the person doing the spending, but a cut to the person receiving it. I don't think the wording is anything to get upset over.

---

Considering the article was full of the SNPs favourite rhetoric and Gideon's announcement tacked on the end I would go further and suggest this is a perfect piece of BBC reporting to counter the somewhat over excited supposition of determined and ongoing BBC bias..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38890090

So refreshing to see the Beeb explaining themselves so thoroughly following Trumpton's accusation of selective reporting on terrorism.

Just a pity they didn't provide and publish the same depth of analysis following accusations of bias reporting during the Indy referendum. It would have been a most interesting read (if factual, of course).

Why is the BBC's main story about Tories raging about Bercow rather than other parties' clapping of Bercow?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hiber-nation

Why is the BBC's main story about Tories raging about Bercow rather than other parties' clapping of Bercow?

---

Because that's the real story. Has he overstepped the mark and broken some unwritten rule on neutrality? I have no idea if he has or hasn't but I'm happy with what he has said. And I always enjoy hearing about raging Tories.
It's nice that he let the clapping go 'just this once' though. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

Because that's the real story. Has he overstepped the mark and broken some unwritten rule on neutrality? I have no idea if he has or hasn't but I'm happy with what he has said. And I always enjoy hearing about raging Tories.
It's nice that he let the clapping go 'just this once' though. :greengrin

---

I know, it just annoyed me today :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

Because that's the real story. Has he overstepped the mark and broken some unwritten rule on neutrality? I have no idea if he has or hasn't but I'm happy with what he has said. And I always enjoy hearing about raging Tories.
It's nice that he let the clapping go 'just this once' though. :greengrin

---

I think the real story is about Johanna Cherry being given a gag during the brexit debate. "Shut up Scotland because your view is meaningless".

Was listening to BBC Scotland today....
Their initial reporting of the SNP manifesto launch was interesting, they reported on a number of the commitments and on a number of occasions various commentators mentioned how little was made of independence and how it had clearly been put into a different "box" for later consideration by the Scottish government.

Apparently there was even boo's, quickly quashed when reporters tried to discuss non manifesto stuff.

As I said.. In the 1st hour, the reporting seemed quite balanced.... Now it seems to have been edited to make the indy question the main talking point.


Apologies in advance dropped phone mid type and sent half the post!

EDIT. What I'm trying to say is that the beeb seem to be trying to hide the actual manifesto by putting indy in front of it.



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Oh ma sides. :faf:
I couldn't get any further than the article title and the columnist whose name appears next to it.
Barefaceness of the highest order. Kettle/teapot, comes to mind.
When I stop laughing, I maybe attempt to read the rest.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41412758

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snooky

Oh ma sides. :faf:
I couldn't get any further than the article title and the columnist whose name appears next to it.
Barefaceness of the highest order. Kettle/teapot, comes to mind.
When I stop laughing, I maybe attempt to read the rest.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41412758

---

I actually feel Nick gets bit of unfair stick. He arrived to cover the Indyref like he was jetting in from another planet.

Most of the Beeb folk from London actually did ok I thought: Peston was really good, Andrew Neil was a **** to both sides. BBC Scotland otoh. James Naughtie was unreal, Jackie Bird, that reporter that got sent to Madrid to find the most rabid PP deputy going ...