Julia Hartley Dooda - Brexit Bias Much?

There are many broadcasters out there ready and willing to serve up debate on the subject of Britain and the EU. All are bound by Ofcom’s rules on impartiality. So perhaps that regulator would like to mosey over sometime to the increasingly piss-poor offerings served up by Murdoch-owned Talk Radio, where every appearance is given that Brexit is not being presented in the most even-handed of ways by one particular host.

Yes thanks, we know who you are

To no surprise at all, the not really pro-Brexit bias, honestly, comes from self-promoting pundit Julia Hartley Brewer, who presents Talk Radio’s breakfast offering, probably because nobody else wanted to do it. One look at those appearing, with the eager promotion of their views, shows the lack of even-handedness.

How might this have manifested itself? Let’s have a look. First off - rubbish anything not offering a good hard Brexit. “Labour's Lord Adonis warns: "If there is no deal then planes won't fly and there will be 50-mile queues at Dover." Can we expect Project Fear from Jeremy Corbyn's Brexit speech today?” Yeah, it’s just Project Fear, and it’s rubbish!

Then it was on to Barry Gardiner for more ridicule, this earning the endorsement of the Leave EU mob, who told happily “@JuliaHB1 ridicules Barry Gardiner and Labour's latest Brexit policy: "If you think Jean-Claude Juncker, Guy Verhofstadt et al are going to agree to give the UK a veto over international trade agreements signed by the EU, you are stark staring mad!” Then, having rubbished one side, it was time to promote the other.

And who better for Ms Hartley Dooda to promote than Jacob Rees Mogg? “Jacob Rees-Mogg: ‘We will be out of the single market, out of the customs union and out of the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice’”. And don’t mention his lying about Jeremy Corbyn.

This theme continued: “Is the issue over the Irish border in the EU withdrawal negotiations ‘a storm in a teacup?’ DUP Brexit spokesman Sammy Wilson speaks to Julia”. That’s right, just speak to one part of one side of the Irish border problem. And on it went.

Next up for the totally unbiased Hartley Dooda show was Bill Cash, who isn’t exactly sitting on the Euro-fence. “Sir Bill Cash: Remainers are orchestrating a ‘highly organised attack on British democracy’”. He’s not shy of losing it on air, either, it seems.

Could she top that? As if you need to ask. “Iain Duncan Smith: ‘Theresa May’s Brexit speech will embarrass the EU which has behaved unbelievably badly and there is a panic about what’s going to happen when the UK leaves’”. As if Iain Duncan Cough is a credible source - even for the Leave side. He’s a congenital liar - as well as not having been anywhere near the action. Panic my arse.

Behold the real boss at Talk Radio

Perhaps it should surprise no-one that having a rabidly Europhobic right-winger hosting a show on a station owned by the Murdoch mafiosi will lean towards a predictable outcome. But the blatant and shameless way in which Julia Hartley Dooda displays her phobia is still surprising. As is her ability to get away with it - so far.

This attempt to bring a little of Fox News to the UK may be for a time, but not for all time.

The Judas Iscariot Of Kings Place

Those who had been hacked, blagged, tailed, monstered, bullied, threatened, victimised, harassed, defrauded, defamed and otherwise misused by the less principled part of the Fourth Estate had for so long one press player in their corner: the Guardian had blown the whistle on phone hacking and use of the “Dark Arts”. It was prepared to break with the mafioso imperative of Omertà. It was there for the little people no-one else cared about.

Kath Viner, editor, the Guardian

Not any more. After long-time editor Alan Rusbridger departed, along with distinguished journalists like Nick Davies and David Leigh, new broom Kath Viner did away with the inconvenience of standing apart. No longer would Guardian hacks and pundits run the gauntlet of being sneered at - and, on occasion, even spat on - by their contemporaries at less principled titles. They would, from now on, have a rather easier life.

Alan Rusbridger - gone but not forgotten

Awards ceremonies would be so much easier to negotiate. There would be fewer hatchet jobs in the Daily Mail. The Guardian would be welcomed back into the fold. But for the victims of press abuse, there would be no such luxury. They would be frozen out, to become, in this new totalitarian press world, un-persons.

Nick Davies - phone hacking whistleblower

So when new Minister for Murdoch Matt Hancock announced the abandonment of the second part of the Leveson Inquiry yesterday, it was no surprise that the Guardian, far from backing the victims of Mazher Mahmood’s dishonesty and criminality, those defamed for kicks by the Daily Mail, the family of Daniel Morgan, and all those whose personal information had been traded illegally, cheered him on.

Andy Coulson - guilty

In an editorial piece - which, if it was not written by Ms Viner, will at the very least enjoy her endorsement - the paper dishonestly asserts “Journalists must be responsible for standards and ethics but it is wrong to think a state body should hold the exercise of power by the press to account”. What “state body” might that be?

Neville Thurlbeck (with both hands on the table) - guilty

On Hancock’s decision, readers are told “This approach should be given a chance”. And on Leveson 2, a superbly meaningless soundbite is conjured up: “in interrogating all these issues, important as they are, Leveson 2 would ultimately end up like a driver learning to steer by looking in the rear-view mirror at the road behind rather than the one ahead”.

Did Ms Viner use Tony Blair’s old catchphrases when compiling this missive? “Forward, not back” … “freedom, not tyranny” … “democracy, not dictatorship” … “no reverse gear” … “sentences, without verbs”. That is how meaningless.

There is the pleading of poverty: “Their circulation has fallen by a third since the Leveson inquiry. In the last decade hundreds of newspapers have closed”. No poor person gets a free pass from the justice system. But a press pretending poverty should. Er, no.

The editorial contradicts itself: after assuring readers “The first part of Leveson had a substantial effect”, it is conceded “The intrusive reporting by some after the Manchester Arena bombing last year should be a cause for introspection, contrition and - if required - apology”. Translation: Leveson 1 without Leveson 2 changes nothing.

Then, at the very end, there is talk of “a free, fair press”, which Ms Viner and her pals know full well we do not have, and will not have, after Hancock’s deal with the devil.

All those traduced by the press establishment looked to the Guardian as the beacon of decency in a world of mafiosi corruption. The paper would fearlessly speak truth to power, and that included the Fourth Estate. And this marks the third betrayal from those at Kings Place. Three times that the Guardian has disowned those it once championed.

In January last year, abandonment of Leveson 2 was backed wholeheartedly as readers were told “What is missing here is an appreciation of the present. Investigations into past behaviour ignore what the media industry is today. Facebook is by far the most pervasive network for news. Google dwarfs others in terms of media distribution. Sparky websites and blogs vie with traditional newsprint for readers and advertising revenue. Yet there is silence on the means to regulate them”. Look over there at Google and Facebook.

The kind of stance that would find favour with the Murdoch, Rothermere and Barclay Brothers titles. Playing the victim and blaming someone else.

February last year brought the second betrayal, as the Commons Culture, Media and Sport committee recommended Leveson 2 should go ahead. The Guardian sat on its hands. The victims of press misbehaviour were passed by on the other side.

No regard paid to those who in days gone by the paper would have been more than happy to hear. Like Charlie Falconer telling “So no enquiry into the extent to which News International and other newspaper groups rode roughshod over innocent victims lives. Powerless dumped. Truth abandoned. Newspaper barons satisfied. Promises broken. Faith in the state further undermined”. Like former Labour leader Ed Miliband concluding “#Leveson2 ditched by government. Predictable, spineless and a total betrayal of every promise made to victims of phone-hacking”.

No regard for its own former writer James Ball’s conclusion “As a reminder, Leveson Part Two was going to be very specifically into phone hacking: who knew what, when, where. It wasn’t intro press regulation or broader culture. Given how much has been spent paying off victims confidentially, there will be some *very* relieved people today”.

And there will be no hearing for Mark Di Stefano’s words. “The Guardian, yes The Guardian, backs the government closing the Leveson inquiry: "Proceeding with Leveson 2 would raise the threat of press regulation while there is no sign of a regulatory framework for Silicon Valley firms…”. Nor those of Brian Cathcart of Kingston University. “Disappointing news: the @Guardian has changed sides on press reform and thrown in its lot with the Murdoch/Mail corporate wrongdoers it once – heroically – exposed. This barely coherent and error-strewn editorial on #Leveson2 is a betrayal and a disgrace”.

When Nick Davies broke the phone hacking story, he was one one occasion confronted by former Screws and Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan, now ITV’s insurance policy against bad press coverage, who hissed “Judas” at him. Those whose careers, reputations, families, hopes and dreams have been so gratuitously trashed by our free and fearless press will not lower themselves to hiss at Kath Viner and her team.

But the name of Judas Iscariot, and all the symbolism loaded into it, will be on their lips as the Guardian once again abandons them in order to have an easier life.

The former flame carrier for liberal journalism has sold its soul. It may never get it back.

Nadine Dorries - The Brexit Of Stupid

After yesterday’s faux outrage from the Tories, getting themselves all in a tizzy after finding those dastardly foreigners in Brussels had bothered to do their homework on the Irish border question, when our useless Government hadn’t, some might have thought that there might be less Brexit idiocy on display while a moment of reflection was ordered. But that thought would have been misplaced, as there is always Tory Brexit idiocy on display.

And always up for a little Tory Brexit idiocy - although probably inadvertently, in her case - is (yes, it’s her again) Nadine Dorries, still imposed on the unfortunate electorate of Mid Bedfordshire, who has been showing the world just how knowledgeable the average Tory back bencher is when it comes to matters European.

Only a fortnight ago, the fragrant Nadine told “I’m giving up Twitter for Lent. My parl staff or publisher may RT or post the odd PR thing but, I won’t be looking and I’m even deleting the app”. But she spoke with forked tongue, and was back this week. “Twitter chatter of a General Election is febrile bonkers. It really isn’t going to happen for another 4 1/2 years”. You read it there first. That may be worth preserving.

Then it was on to saying very silly things about the EU. “EU growth is shrinking. Global markets growing. For Britain to grow, we need to be free to trade with the rest of the world. We can’t do that if we are in The Customs Union”. The rest of the EU is now growing faster than the UK. And Germany manages to trade with the rest of the world, doing more trade than we do with both China and India. But facts, eh? Do go on.

“The MPs in my own party and Labour spouting untrue rubbish that we already can free trade globally are desperate. We cannot ‘free’ trade - the EU forces us to impose heavy tariffs pushing up the price of goods. They really believe that the public are very gullible and or/ stupid”. No it doesn’t, as the Murdoch Sun found out yesterday.

“They also say very stupid things, such as, ‘we must put the country 1st.’ How about putting the poor 1st, who pay through the nose for food, shoes and clothes at prices fixed by the unelected protectionist racket that is the CU?” Two things here. One, if she gave a flying foxtrot about the poor, what’s she doing in the Tory Party and backing Brexit? And two, how do you elect a Customs Union? Oh, and a CU is not “protectionist”.

Then comes her endorsement of the Sun’s pack of lies on tariffs: “For those who favour a CU take a look at a breakdown from the @TheSun and see how much we pay in tariffs. The CU is a corrupt and rigged by Eurocrats and in no way benefits British people - we are being ripped off!” No we aren’t - the Sun’s claims were so wrong, the article was pulled. There is no rigging, and if there is corruption, she’s not revealing any.

And the Brexit of idiocy is never complete without reference to Mrs T., who was one of the prime movers behind the Single Market, although that detail never gets admitted by her admirers. Instead, Ms Dorries used an old Thatcher reference to kick John Major: “Body language of traitor Major sat next to her is revealing”. Traitor! Off with his head!

She then “wholeheartedly agreed” with someone who slagged off Major over the Maastricht Treaty and then claimed he had tried to take the UK into the Euro. The same John Major who negotiated a Maastricht Treaty opt-out for the UK on, er, the Euro.

Still, more of those pesky details, eh? Back to slagging off Major. “John Major who allowed no free vote in Parliament on Mastricht treaty? Who aggressively whipped through with the dark arts of the whips office in full force, called his Eurosceptic colleagues bastards and is now asking for TM to allow a free vote - something he refused?” The “aggressively whipped through with the dark arts of the whips office” is interesting, if moderately silly.

It only remained, after doling out all that intemperate abuse, to shout “look over there”. And so she did just that: “The twitter trolling and abuse many are receiving from those with the #FBPE is just plain tedious, mostly offensive and foul mouthed. I’m switching off notifications so will no longer see, or be able to reply to anyone - sorry”. Bit like she was giving up Twitter for Lent, then.

Nadine Dorries clearly knows so little about the EU and its constructs, and is so committed to being against anything and everything about it, that she is prepared to believe any old pack of lies the press serves up on the subject. Yet there she is, still drawing an MP’s salary and playing the victim. While aggressively attacking those she dislikes.

Behold the Brexit of stupid. That’s who’s in charge right now. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Leveson 2 - Tory Shame

Showing that the solemn promise of a UK Prime Minister is not worth having, and under cover of the faux sideshow stirred up over what Max Mosley may or may not have done well over half a century ago, the Tories have showed the world that they have done the ultimate deal with the devil, as Culture Secretary and press puppet Matt Hancock reads from his pre-prepared instructions and abandons Part 2 of the Leveson Inquiry.

Billed as either a re-run of Leveson Part 1, or going over more of the same, neither of which is true, Part 2 of Leveson would have lifted the lid on the corrupt relationships between press and Police, and indeed between press and politicians. It would have shed light on “Fake Sheikh” Mazher Mahmood, Hillsborough, Orgreave, the Daniel Morgan murder, and the criminal use of the “Dark Arts” by the press.

The deal which Hancock has announced, and his boss Theresa May has done with those who run our free and fearless press, sweeps all of that under the carpet. All the hacking, blagging, bin rifling, surveillance, harassment, doxxing, evidence tampering, evidence deletion, the threatening letters, the threatening phone calls, that is all swept away and the slate cleaned. Those criminal enterprises got away with it again.

In return for this, the Tories will do what the press establishment wants. I’ll go further: they must do what the press establishment wants. They are now handcuffed to the rotting corpse of print media, and as culpable for all the criminality.

The Tories’ capitulation to their new masters did not go down well with those who know the nature of this particular beast. Steven Nott, who discovered the secret of phone hacking and was smeared and abused by the tabloid press as a result, observed “What a disgrace. What an absolute disgrace. I'm ashamed of this country and it's attitude to victims of press abuse. The cover up continues”. Cover up is right. And there was more.

Steven Barnett of the University of Westminster put best foot forward to note “Government caves in to ferocious press lobbying and cancels second part of Leveson Inquiry. Who said that press power was diminishing?” Rosie Robertson told “Matt Hancock announces #Leveson2 is not to go ahead, does he?? So those cosy tête-à-tête meetings/dinners between May/Paul Dacre, the posts in crucial departments doled out to right-wing Murdoch ‘journalists’ and others have paid off, it seems. Very bad news for UK democracy!”

Alastair Morgan, still seeking answers to the unsolved murder of his brother, mused “Tories have now cancelled Leveson 2. The fellatio continues”. And Brian Cathcart pointed out “A week ago the Commons Home Affairs committee revealed that IPSO had upheld only one out of 8,100 complaints relating to discrimination and hate speech in the press. Matt Hancock regards this as 'satisfactory'. It's not. It is licensing hate speech”.

Dan Waddell summed it up: “The newspapers spent millions and millions of pounds on breaking the law on a daily basis - not just The News of the World, but The Sun, The Mail newspapers and The Mirror group … Those newspapers were criminal enterprises from top to bottom and many of the people who broke the law are now in senior positions … Meanwhile a series of editors and execs and journalists lied on oath to the first part of the Leveson Inquiry”. The Tories are prepared to excuse that for some favourable press. And some people still wonder why press and politicians are held in such low regard.

Jacob Rees Mogg - Pants On Fire

Tory MPs telling blatant whoppers about the Labour leadership seems to be rather more than an isolated incident: while the singularly repellent Ben Bradley, still a vice-chairman of the party despite blatantly breaking its code of conduct, makes the required donation to a homeless charity and a food bank in his own constituency after his spy smear of Jeremy Corbyn, another hopeful soul has fetched up before the cameras.

This time it is the honourable member for times long past Jacob Rees Mogg stepping up to the plate to say something about Jezza that is not true. What is worse is that he either knew what he was saying was not true, or had not bothered to do his homework. Whatever the explanation, it underscores the growing awareness that Rees Mogg is not a particularly pleasant piece of work. The subject, as so often nowadays, was Brexit.

Rees Mogg had appeared before the cameras on Channel 4 News yesterday evening. He had already managed a cheap and sneering dismissal of John Major - his former party leader and former Prime Minister - so when he claimed, on the subject of the Good Friday Agreement, that Corbyn had voted against it, this was entirely in keeping with his coupling of a patrician demeanour with rather more thuggish behaviour.

Jezza, as any fule kno, voted for the agreement. He voted against the Anglo-Irish Agreement, but the two are not the same thing. The reaction was swift - rather more swift than Rees Mogg’s apology, which has only just materialised - sort of. Alex Nunns was quick to nail the lie: “Here's @Jacob_Rees_Mogg telling a lie on Channel 4 News. Jeremy Corbyn voted for the Good Friday Agreement”.

Labour MP Laura Pidcock followed up with “It’s unacceptable that, once again, a Tory MP has openly lied about @jeremycorbyn. Last week it was @bbradleymp, this time it’s @Jacob_Rees_Mogg, claiming on @Channel4 that Jeremy voted against the Good Friday Agreement when in fact, he voted for it. We need a public apology”.

Others expressed their disgust. “I think, if JRM doesn't issue a retraction and apology, we are entitled to conclude that it was a deliberate lie” … “Jacob Rees-Mogg just said on #c4news that @jeremycorbyn voted against the Good Friday Agreement. That's a lie” … “Jon Snow has just confirm Jacob Rees-Mogg was actually lying when he said that. Thanks, Channel 4 #FactCheck!” And there was more.

Another Tweeter claimed “Mogg also lied about gov't leaflets that allegedly said leaving the EU meant leaving the single market. I can't find such a leaflet”, while Peter Stefanovic mused “I’m sure @Jacob_Rees_Mogg will be tweeting an apology to @jeremycorbyn tonight for saying on Channel 4 news Corbyn voted against the Good Friday Agreement when it’s a matter of record he voted for it! A donation to a charity of Mr Corbyn’s choice would also be most welcome”. What say Rees Mogg to that?

Eventually - like at just before 0930 hours today - Rees Mogg climbed down from his lofty perch to admit “Mea culpa, I was wrong to say that Mr Corbyn voted against the Good Friday Agreement. He did not”. That should, perhaps, read “Mea maxima culpa”.

And he still hasn’t said sorry. One rule for the high Tory, another for the plebs, eh?