As a result of the Tories not actually taking action to permanently hobble the hated BBC, the Murdoch shilling-takers have clearly been instructed to step up their assault on the Corporation, but here a problem enters. The Sun and Times can only generate so much hate from within their own ranks, so today outside help has been brought in, with the appearance in the former paper of James “saviour of Western civilisation” Delingpole.
"Gay marriage" ... "Global warming" ... "Eco crucifixes" ... "Red meat conservatism" ... "Not just Barking but halfway to Upminster"
Del Boy has brought forth “Bloated Beeb websites are a recipe for leftie domination”, but sadly for the Murdoch poodles, he has also brought forth a significant amount of falsehood and misinformation too, as will be shown. He starts by putting the boot into Billy Bragg and Jack Monroe “Not because they are nasty or evil but because they are classic examples of nanny-state Britain, well-meaning fools who sincerely believe the only way to create a better society is with yet more handouts from the public sector”.
Staying classy, then. But do go on. “To listen to campaigners, you would think the only place on Earth you can find a decent recipe is the BBC Food website … And they are right, up to a point … Most of us have tried some of these … They are tried and tested … They work … But so they ruddy well ought to … We have paid for it all, millions of pounds a year, via our licence fee”. Millions? It’s £145.50 a year, Del.
And that is where he goes wrong, continuing “The idea the BBC is providing some incredible free social service is a nonsense”. Nobody suggests that. We paid our £145.50 - or did he forget that? He certainly forgot his 20th Century history, as he claims without the BBC “All it would mean is the internet traffic would go to cookery sites run by private enterprise rather than to a leftover from 1920s ‘Big Brother’ Britain”.
Nineteen Eighty Four, the novel from which we get the idea of “Big Brother”, was published in 1949. And that is not the only whopper: “We are often told - by the BBC, mostly - that the service it offers is the ‘envy of the world’”. No, that phrase is the one wheeled out by sneering right-wing pundits when the Beeb messes something up (the phrase is also used by detractors of the NHS whenever something goes wrong there).
Then he goes totally gaga: “But in truth the BBC is - and has been for years - the propaganda arm of the metropolitan, politically correct elite whose trendy leftist obsessions are often of little interest to people in the country at large … This bias - pro-EU, anti-business, captured by the money-grabbing voluntary sector”. What obsessions? What bias? We don’t find out. He can’t provide any. Or evidence of that bias.
But we do get “the BBC’s protected, heavily subsidised - to the tune of £4.8billion last year - near-monopoly”. It’s not subsidised, and, as we have ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5, Sky and others in the marketplace, it’s not protected either. And Del’s BBC rant would not be complete without “How are commercial news- papers expected to compete when the BBC, with its eye-watering online budget of £201million”. What has hurt newspapers is the decline in advertising revenue - and the BBC does not carry adverts.
Del, in any case, doesn’t think the BBC should have an online presence. “Since when was it the BBC’s job to have a website, anyway?” he bleats. “It is supposed to be a broadcaster, not a publisher”. Er, since when was it newspapers’ jobs to have a broadcast presence? Or did Del forget all those podcasts he participates in, and then promotes?
Then we get another whopper at the end: “James Delingpole writes for the Spectator”. It would be more correct to say that he writes first and foremost for Breitbart, the batshit collective peddling climate change denial, UKIP propaganda, and a variety of right-wing bigotry. So he’s ideal Sun material, then - totally out of touch with reality.
Still, he gets paid for it, and it meets the demands of Creepy Uncle Rupe, so that’s all right, then.
6 comments:
The Delingpoid states that the BBC is
"pro-EU, anti-business, captured by the money-grabbing voluntary sector".
what is this "money-grabbing voluntary sector" of which the poid speaks?
the word voluntary, as in the voluntary sector, means that it is funded from er, voluntary donations. Money is not grabbed, it is given.
Bloody hell, even recipes are now seen as left wing by the terminally batshit insane.
Del Boy Spiv is a near classic example of the neocon-in-waiting.
In other words, if you think the present gang of thieves is a low point just wait until dopes like Mathew Hancock step up. Have you seen that crazy Nazi harridan Soubry?
But Del Boy Spiv does have a function. He's a warning of What Neocon Nightmares Will Come.
Ignore the warning......and you deserve what you get......
The right can't make up its mind about voluntary organisations. One day they're money-grubbing, politically motivated parasites, the next they're supposed to be running social services, with no pay. You can't have it both ways.
The BBC is forced to pick up the tab for the over 75 licences, so immediately drops the Met Office as it's weather forecaster, thus forcing the government to pick up the tab for said Met Office which is an essential national service that the BBC has been "subsidising" for years! The BBC is attacked for supposedly taking ad revenue from other web sites with things like all it's recipes, so moves the recipes to a commercial site which does take ads and which therefore will have more traffic and therefore more ad revenue, thus potentially removing ad revenue from the sites that have been complaining ...... Am I beginning to see a pattern of clever BBC management moves ........
Jack Monroe, eh? The reaction of some to Jack has always puzzled me. Single parent, refused to be beaten down, spotted a niche in the market, self-made success story. Pulling yourself up by the bootstraps and all that. But for some reason, the batshit right don't see that at all.
You'd have to conclude that 'working hard and wanting to get on*' isn't what they want at all, rather an underclass of the pathetically grateful, living on scraps.
*D'oh! 'Wanting to' - of course! All the promise and none of the delivery!
Post a Comment