Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
lets hope Beth Rigby is next. She breaks Skys guidelines every day she's on
Show More
What I don't understand is why only Munchetty? It was Dan Walker asking a leading question of his co presenter so surely he was at least as culpable.
Bound to be reversed or penalty free now Sir Lenny amongst others have voiced their disgust at the said rollicking.
Walker can't be blamed for her answer; even though i tend to agree with you. What is interesting in this time of high emotion; is the fact that at last some entity has acted. Time after time & day after day things are said by MSM employees that break guidelines; & it is good to see at least an attempt to tell them to STFU & to keep your personal opinions to yourself. Sky media needs to have a long hard look at itself & it's employees
I think it was right what she said ie no one esp one in a position of enormous influence and power can tell another person of different colour to go back where they came from; she was only pointing out the obvious ie what Joe public are thinking.
so if i say on air (as a Beeb employee) that a convicted child-killer is a murdering bastard; that should be allowed because it's "what Joe Public thinks"?
BBC presenters aren't allowed to express an opinion. That's why they never say good morning.
It is all a staged event by the bbc, the letter of complaint didnt take any time to arrive.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-49850738
(I've swapped the order of the two paragraphs around as I think it reads better that way)
David Jordan, the BBC's head of editorial standards, said Munchetty was not found in breach for "calling out racist comments, which is perfectly acceptable where things are clearly framed in racist language". She is not facing any disciplinary action or reprimand.
Munchetty was found to have breached guidelines by criticising the US president's motives after he had said four female politicians should "go back" to "places from which they came".
Makes sense to me. She can say that Trump used racist language because he did but she can't say what his motives for so doing were as she doesn't know.
(I've swapped the order of the two paragraphs around as I think it reads better that way)
David Jordan, the BBC's head of editorial standards, said Munchetty was not found in breach for "calling out racist comments, which is perfectly acceptable where things are clearly framed in racist language". She is not facing any disciplinary action or reprimand.
Munchetty was found to have breached guidelines by criticising the US president's motives after he had said four female politicians should "go back" to "places from which they came".
Makes sense to me. She can say that Trump used racist language because he did but she can't say what his motives for so doing were as she doesn't know.
I understand BBC personnel are not allowed/supposed to express an opinion however, what President Trump said was so ignorant, old-fashioned and abhorrent and saying what Joe public is thinking is an exception given her own ethnicity and personal experiences. And, as a tv licence payer I totally agree with her. What she said was not political or bias as opposed to President Trump's statement.
The left like to cherry-pick to suit their agenda. When you see what he actually said, the far-left hissy fit fizzles out.
'So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful
Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don't they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!'
'So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful
Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don't they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!'
do people come from other countries and tell us how to behave then? Like obama or others that try it on in courts of the land?
just asking?
just asking?
No, but what President Trump said or implied/insinuated was odious and not conducive from someone with influence, power and following. What President Trump said publicly was experienced by many ethnic minority here (still do) in private, and has no place in society these days - the world's moved on and time's changed.
Is that not sexist? What has her looks got to do with our discussion? She's highly articulate and intelligent - an attraction to most. Your opinion is probably yours only.
Doubt it!
Trump does have a point though,how will other countries improve their status/society if people who have travelled and done well for themselves don't return and help those less fortunate ?
The BBC is facing a growing crisis over its decision to censure the presenter Naga Munchetty over comments she made about Donald Trump, amid a furious backlash inside and outside the corporation.
The BBC Breakfast presenter was found to have breached her employer’s editorial guidelines when she told viewers she felt “absolutely furious” about the US president’s language, shortly after he told four non-white Democratic congresswomen, all US citizens, to “go home”.
The corporation’s executive complaints unit partially upheld a single complaint from a member of the public, leading to a staff revolt and growing anger at how the BBC balances its duty to staff and audiences when it comes to issues of race.
As the row developed:
Dozens of prominent black British media figures – including Sir Lenny Henry and Adrian Lester – protested against the decision and call for increased representation for non-white individuals in the BBC’s complaints process.
Serving BBC journalists defied warnings from their bosses to stay quiet on the issue and publicly expressed their support for Munchetty.
More than 40 Labour MPs wrote to the BBC director general, Tony Hall, in protest, with the backing of party leader Jeremy Corbyn.
The media regulator, Ofcom, took the unusual step of launching its own parallel assessment.
BBC employees are circulating petitions demanding the decision is reconsidered, with one journalist saying it had galvanised staff in a way that few issues have before. “People are dismayed by the decision and I don’t think the upper level [of management] saw it coming. I saw people who are usually quite shy of engaging in any kind of dissent rallying for signatures.”
Embrace, the BBC black and minority ethnic staff network, which has 500 members, said it had written to BBC bosses to “convey the strength of feeling of both black and minority ethnic staff and non black and minority ethnic staff” about the decision. “This action will destroy trust and damage the reputation of the BBC, and needs to be reversed. We await an urgent response,” it said.
In the letter to Hall, organised by Labour’s Seema Malhotra, the MPs called for an urgent meeting with the director genera. They said: “It is of particular concern that this decision has been reached when we are facing a rise in hate crime.”
The BBC’s editorial standards director, David Jordan, attempted to defuse the situation on Friday, telling Radio 4’s Today programme that people may have “wilfully” misunderstood the nature of the ruling against Munchetty.
He said there was no doubt that Trump’s original comments were racist, agreed that it was entirely within Munchetty’s right to describe those comments as racist on air, and said the presenter was allowed to provide analysis to viewers about how a person of colour felt when they were told to “go home”.
However, Jordan insisted she had breached editorial guidelines because she appeared to make a judgment on Trump’s personality, saying it is not the BBC’s job to be “calling out people for being liars or racist”.
He added: “In the politics of the present, when we are in a politics of name-calling and insult, I think it’s probably unwise of the BBC to be calling out people for being liars or racist. What is really important is that we look at the things people say, we analyse them, we describe them objectively.”
Late on Friday afternoon in an email to all BBC staff, Hall and the BBC executive committee said: “Naga Munchetty – one of our stars – was completely within her rights to speak about the tweets of Donald Trump which have been widely condemned as racist. We completely back her in saying ‘as a woman of colour, to go back where I came from, that was embedded in racism’. She was speaking honestly and from the heart about her own experiences. We admire her for it and she was completely justified in doing so.”
The email ended by saying that diversity was “not negotiable”.
One prominent black on-screen presenter said there was “bafflement” that Munchetty had been admonished when the likes of recently departed Today programme presenter John Humphrys were often perceived to have expressed personal opinions.
They said the incident had led to discussions among some non-white journalists that they are used as “window dressing” by the corporation’s news bosses, despite the BBC having one of the most diverse workforces in British media.
In a public letter, the actors Lenny Henry, Adrian Lester and David Harewood, and presenters Krishnan Guru-Murthy and Gillian Joseph, are among signatories describing the decision as “racially discriminatory treatment”.
The letter’s signatories, who also include the broadcaster and writer Afua Hirsch and the science journalist Angela Saini, say that BBC journalists have contacted them privately to express concern about the “climate of fear” at the organisation and concerns over the consequences of their speaking out in support of the statement.
Among those who have also backed the presenter are the chancellor, Sajid Javid, who called the decision “ridiculous” and added that Munchetty’s reaction was “perfectly understandable”.
Senior BBC news staff have raised concerns about the decision at the daily editorial management meetings.
“People pointed out that Dan Walker encouraged that discussion,” said one insider, who said there were real concerns among staff about how complaints system is not capable of dealing with members of the public acting in bad faith. “If Tommy Robinson is reading all of this he can just start complaining about BBC presenters day-in-day-out until one of the complaints lands.”
There have been particular concerns within parts of the BBC that have large numbers of non-white journalists, such as BBC World and Asian Network, where managers say they have struggled to explain the nuance of the corporation’s own decision to confused staff.
BBC sources suggested the corporation is now backed into a corner, with no easy way to undo the ruling given the quasi-independence of the complaints unit, leaving management essentially unable to defuse the situation. The ruling did not come out of the blue but followed discussions with programme chiefs at BBC Breakfast, which has been in the process of transferring to a new editor this summer.
In an unusual move, Ofcom has agreed to assess Munchetty’s exchange against its own broadcasting code after a request from the Labour MP Chi Onwurah. Its team are already reviewing the footage and a verdict on whether to launch an investigation is expected next week.
This would potentially undermine the BBC’s own complaints process and heighten calls for the corporation’s complaints procedures to be entirely outsourced to Ofcom, which has responsibility for enforcing standards in the rest of the broadcast media. At the moment the BBC has a special opt-out for early-stage complaints.
Munchetty has so far declined to comment on the row, which has focused attention on the editorial complaints unit, the seven-strong arbiter of BBC values that is dominated by older, white men.
Many non-white BBC journalists have called for increased clarity on who works for the unit and greater diversity in the complaints process.
The official finding of the complaints unit found that Munchetty was wrong to comment critically on the possible motive for, and potential consequences of, the president’s words: “Judgments of that kind are for the audience to make, and the exchange fell short of due impartiality in that respect.”
At no point did Munchetty directly accuse Trump of being a racist in the brief exchange, which took place in response to questions on her personal feelings from her co-host, Walker.
The Labour MP Clive Lewis has also filed an early day motion to allow members of parliament to object: “You can’t be ‘impartial’ on racism. There are certain values in democratic society which transcend impartiality, and we’re entitled to call them out.”
Lewis added: “It also goes to show that the level of BME representation at the BBC is only skin deep. It doesn’t feel to me that there are enough people of colour in positions of editorial influence.”
The BBC Breakfast presenter was found to have breached her employer’s editorial guidelines when she told viewers she felt “absolutely furious” about the US president’s language, shortly after he told four non-white Democratic congresswomen, all US citizens, to “go home”.
The corporation’s executive complaints unit partially upheld a single complaint from a member of the public, leading to a staff revolt and growing anger at how the BBC balances its duty to staff and audiences when it comes to issues of race.
As the row developed:
Dozens of prominent black British media figures – including Sir Lenny Henry and Adrian Lester – protested against the decision and call for increased representation for non-white individuals in the BBC’s complaints process.
Serving BBC journalists defied warnings from their bosses to stay quiet on the issue and publicly expressed their support for Munchetty.
More than 40 Labour MPs wrote to the BBC director general, Tony Hall, in protest, with the backing of party leader Jeremy Corbyn.
The media regulator, Ofcom, took the unusual step of launching its own parallel assessment.
BBC employees are circulating petitions demanding the decision is reconsidered, with one journalist saying it had galvanised staff in a way that few issues have before. “People are dismayed by the decision and I don’t think the upper level [of management] saw it coming. I saw people who are usually quite shy of engaging in any kind of dissent rallying for signatures.”
Embrace, the BBC black and minority ethnic staff network, which has 500 members, said it had written to BBC bosses to “convey the strength of feeling of both black and minority ethnic staff and non black and minority ethnic staff” about the decision. “This action will destroy trust and damage the reputation of the BBC, and needs to be reversed. We await an urgent response,” it said.
In the letter to Hall, organised by Labour’s Seema Malhotra, the MPs called for an urgent meeting with the director genera. They said: “It is of particular concern that this decision has been reached when we are facing a rise in hate crime.”
The BBC’s editorial standards director, David Jordan, attempted to defuse the situation on Friday, telling Radio 4’s Today programme that people may have “wilfully” misunderstood the nature of the ruling against Munchetty.
He said there was no doubt that Trump’s original comments were racist, agreed that it was entirely within Munchetty’s right to describe those comments as racist on air, and said the presenter was allowed to provide analysis to viewers about how a person of colour felt when they were told to “go home”.
However, Jordan insisted she had breached editorial guidelines because she appeared to make a judgment on Trump’s personality, saying it is not the BBC’s job to be “calling out people for being liars or racist”.
He added: “In the politics of the present, when we are in a politics of name-calling and insult, I think it’s probably unwise of the BBC to be calling out people for being liars or racist. What is really important is that we look at the things people say, we analyse them, we describe them objectively.”
Late on Friday afternoon in an email to all BBC staff, Hall and the BBC executive committee said: “Naga Munchetty – one of our stars – was completely within her rights to speak about the tweets of Donald Trump which have been widely condemned as racist. We completely back her in saying ‘as a woman of colour, to go back where I came from, that was embedded in racism’. She was speaking honestly and from the heart about her own experiences. We admire her for it and she was completely justified in doing so.”
The email ended by saying that diversity was “not negotiable”.
One prominent black on-screen presenter said there was “bafflement” that Munchetty had been admonished when the likes of recently departed Today programme presenter John Humphrys were often perceived to have expressed personal opinions.
They said the incident had led to discussions among some non-white journalists that they are used as “window dressing” by the corporation’s news bosses, despite the BBC having one of the most diverse workforces in British media.
In a public letter, the actors Lenny Henry, Adrian Lester and David Harewood, and presenters Krishnan Guru-Murthy and Gillian Joseph, are among signatories describing the decision as “racially discriminatory treatment”.
The letter’s signatories, who also include the broadcaster and writer Afua Hirsch and the science journalist Angela Saini, say that BBC journalists have contacted them privately to express concern about the “climate of fear” at the organisation and concerns over the consequences of their speaking out in support of the statement.
Among those who have also backed the presenter are the chancellor, Sajid Javid, who called the decision “ridiculous” and added that Munchetty’s reaction was “perfectly understandable”.
Senior BBC news staff have raised concerns about the decision at the daily editorial management meetings.
“People pointed out that Dan Walker encouraged that discussion,” said one insider, who said there were real concerns among staff about how complaints system is not capable of dealing with members of the public acting in bad faith. “If Tommy Robinson is reading all of this he can just start complaining about BBC presenters day-in-day-out until one of the complaints lands.”
There have been particular concerns within parts of the BBC that have large numbers of non-white journalists, such as BBC World and Asian Network, where managers say they have struggled to explain the nuance of the corporation’s own decision to confused staff.
BBC sources suggested the corporation is now backed into a corner, with no easy way to undo the ruling given the quasi-independence of the complaints unit, leaving management essentially unable to defuse the situation. The ruling did not come out of the blue but followed discussions with programme chiefs at BBC Breakfast, which has been in the process of transferring to a new editor this summer.
In an unusual move, Ofcom has agreed to assess Munchetty’s exchange against its own broadcasting code after a request from the Labour MP Chi Onwurah. Its team are already reviewing the footage and a verdict on whether to launch an investigation is expected next week.
This would potentially undermine the BBC’s own complaints process and heighten calls for the corporation’s complaints procedures to be entirely outsourced to Ofcom, which has responsibility for enforcing standards in the rest of the broadcast media. At the moment the BBC has a special opt-out for early-stage complaints.
Munchetty has so far declined to comment on the row, which has focused attention on the editorial complaints unit, the seven-strong arbiter of BBC values that is dominated by older, white men.
Many non-white BBC journalists have called for increased clarity on who works for the unit and greater diversity in the complaints process.
The official finding of the complaints unit found that Munchetty was wrong to comment critically on the possible motive for, and potential consequences of, the president’s words: “Judgments of that kind are for the audience to make, and the exchange fell short of due impartiality in that respect.”
At no point did Munchetty directly accuse Trump of being a racist in the brief exchange, which took place in response to questions on her personal feelings from her co-host, Walker.
The Labour MP Clive Lewis has also filed an early day motion to allow members of parliament to object: “You can’t be ‘impartial’ on racism. There are certain values in democratic society which transcend impartiality, and we’re entitled to call them out.”
Lewis added: “It also goes to show that the level of BME representation at the BBC is only skin deep. It doesn’t feel to me that there are enough people of colour in positions of editorial influence.”
in answer to trilby ,i find her very attractive ,gorgeous even .different strokes.....
She's like a small brown trans version of Alex The Kidd imo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-f1UfA_B5o
By the way if you work with people like that be very wary
they are attempting to make themselves unsackable , her bosses will be very careful not to tip toe around them
and when it comes to layoffs will be worried about accusations of racism
And fire you instead
they are attempting to make themselves unsackable , her bosses will be very careful not to tip toe around them
and when it comes to layoffs will be worried about accusations of racism
And fire you instead
"As a woman of colour...." FFS, the racist and feminist card in a 'win double' that 'fell at the first'. a quicker witted more intelligent 'Presenter' would have said next question, and repeated that 'mantra' until he moved on, or 'we present the news our viewers decide what they think of it'.. He set a trap for her as she 'ran' into it, I wonder why, 
.
.
does anyone actually find this Munchy woman attractive?
Lol, I can see your point.
I must admit I don't find her attractive either, her hairstyle doesn't help, it makes her look like a bloke.
Television presenters should make an effort to look good.
And as a license fee payer, I have every right to criticise the looks of people who present BBC shows.
Time the BBC went subscription only, and we can choose whose pockets our money goes into.
I for one would not pay to watch the BBC, purely over their poor choice of presenters.
Lol, I can see your point.
I must admit I don't find her attractive either, her hairstyle doesn't help, it makes her look like a bloke.
Television presenters should make an effort to look good.
And as a license fee payer, I have every right to criticise the looks of people who present BBC shows.
Time the BBC went subscription only, and we can choose whose pockets our money goes into.
I for one would not pay to watch the BBC, purely over their poor choice of presenters.
Never liked her Dr C, I have always thought her too smug for her own good.
Some of these BBC presenters, Norman Smith in particular, need to watch themselves occasionally.
He stands there with hands waving all over the place which detracts considerably from what he's saying.
I always think to myself ''keep still you f'ing prat'' and just read out what's written on the board in front of you.
He's okay on the radio, but only because you can't see his antics. Which he probably saves for television anyway. It's completely unnatural.
BBC presenters are all the same in this respect. And it only makes them look silly, because we know they have been told to do it.
David Attenborough is another example of the BBC school of acting like a pillock in front of the camera.
Speaking so slowly he could bore a horse to sleep.
He stands there with hands waving all over the place which detracts considerably from what he's saying.
I always think to myself ''keep still you f'ing prat'' and just read out what's written on the board in front of you.
He's okay on the radio, but only because you can't see his antics. Which he probably saves for television anyway. It's completely unnatural.
BBC presenters are all the same in this respect. And it only makes them look silly, because we know they have been told to do it.
David Attenborough is another example of the BBC school of acting like a pillock in front of the camera.
Speaking so slowly he could bore a horse to sleep.
The hand waving does my head in, most of them couldn't say a word if their hands were tied behind their backs. 
And when they waggle their podgy little fingers in the air to indicate inverted commas, that really annoys me.
If I had my way I'd chop their fingers off!
If I had my way I'd chop their fingers off!
I don’t particularly like her either as already stated by boxingthefox she is to smug for her own good ,however on this occasion I feel she has been badly treated.
Jeremy vine did a piece on radio 2 on Friday about this he ended by saying the bbc were unavailable for comment
Jeremy vine did a piece on radio 2 on Friday about this he ended by saying the bbc were unavailable for comment
Alastair Stewart made a good comment recently on TV, it is not the job of news presenters to offer their opinions and influence opinion,it is their job to present the facts and let viewers form their own opinions from the facts.Well said.
Cant afford to lose her and see the diversity table slide.
Maybe the old dears and old-fashioned pen-pushers at the BBC a review of their suitability given present climate could be instigated on account of this decision. The reasons they gave just did not sit well with me as the statements made by President Trump were clearly outrageous and inflammatory as it could only fuel further hatred and disrespect.
once your box has been ticked you are a protected species and no one DARE say anything around them
pandora's box was opened a long time ago and the door of free speech was slammed shut
now you can go to jail for saying the wrong word
pandora's box was opened a long time ago and the door of free speech was slammed shut
now you can go to jail for saying the wrong word
except on Sky news; where guidelines & rules are as useful as a dumbbell to Jezza
The old dears and pen-pushers at the BBC did not use common sense and worldly wisdom when coming to their decision instead just the role of presenters at the BBC. They need to get out more - they are so out of touch.
i've not seen her since this story broke. Maybe there is a golf tourney she's at
She's normally on in the latter part of the week; she's witty and can think on her feet.
always liked her tbh, she gets a rough time on here though
Sep 27, 2019 -- 7:10PM, lybertyne wrote:
The left like to cherry-pick to suit their agenda. When you see what he actually said, the far-left hissy fit fizzles out.'So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerfulNation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don't they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!'
rofl three of them were born in the usa, they didn't come from any other country. It says a lot about you that you think that the whole sentence is any less offensive than part.
I think some men find intelligent and learned females intimidate their comfort zones.
Complaint decision now reversed,apparently. Probably right but I hope presenters do tone down their own opinions and just report the facts now.
Maybe Mr David Jordan, the head of BBC's editorial standards, might need to consider his own position. The original decision arrived at was obviously wrong and lacking sensitivity or understanding why she felt so strongly about it, and rightly so; little or no common sense attached except reiterating the role of a presenter.
The head of head honchos has to intervene for sense to prevail.
The head of head honchos has to intervene for sense to prevail.
Unfortunate to catch 5 minutes of Piers Morgan on TVAM this morning.
Was before this decision was made, and obviously on a different channel but he just harangue Reid and whoever else in support of Johnson and then goading the climate kids.
Made me compare the two.
I don't mind journalists expressing an opinion (though I'd prefer them to just be well researched, ask tough and interesting questions and call bullsh!t when that's what they're faced with) but I don't understand ITV's editorial position allowing that buffoon to treat the programme like his own soapbox.
Was before this decision was made, and obviously on a different channel but he just harangue Reid and whoever else in support of Johnson and then goading the climate kids.
Made me compare the two.
I don't mind journalists expressing an opinion (though I'd prefer them to just be well researched, ask tough and interesting questions and call bullsh!t when that's what they're faced with) but I don't understand ITV's editorial position allowing that buffoon to treat the programme like his own soapbox.
wind up the plebs, ratings = £££££
kuensberg itching to get a slice of itv freedom and £££££££
Must be hell working in a straightjacket like the BBC, that programme W1AA seems more like a documentary than a comedy !
Piers Morgan is one of the very few journalists I find extremely revolting - I always switch channel whenever he comes on should I be unlucky to catch him. He's pompous, and thinks just because he was the editor of a tabloid (Mirror) once he knows it all. He's also very quick to dish out his thoughts sometimes vociferously and insensitively; an extremely lucky man when he escaped scot-free when his mates at the paper were sent down for insider-dealing on a stock they ramped-up and sold almost immediately or soon after. I believe at least one of the journalists at the paper was sent down for a period for his greedy deed. But Mr Piers Morgan escaped scot-free despite profitng financially (I think £10k - £20k) from it.
He soon left the paper; did not stay long in America either - how he got that job only the Almighty knows; an odious character well past his used-by-date.
He soon left the paper; did not stay long in America either - how he got that job only the Almighty knows; an odious character well past his used-by-date.
Why don't they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done.
I thought that was fair comment from the great Don.
Naga's words simply drew attention to the dark side of her character.
I thought that was fair comment from the great Don.
Naga's words simply drew attention to the dark side of her character.
These people have come to the two greatest countries in the history of the world ( America and Britain )
from god knows where
They should respect that and be thankful
from god knows where
They should respect that and be thankful
They soon learn how to bite the hand that feeds them.
BBC created the story by misquoting Trump and paying no attention to the context of what the Squad had been saying.
They then make a right balls up of handling complaints. 100 MPs wrote to the BBC (I thought they were busy) and they back down.
And WE pay for that...
They then make a right balls up of handling complaints. 100 MPs wrote to the BBC (I thought they were busy) and they back down.
And WE pay for that...
The BBC's Newsnight was 100% anti-Trump before and after he got elected.
It was anti-Trump propaganda night after night.
The presenter then was the lefty Evan Davis who is very anti-Trump, but he survived because he ticked one of the BBC's diversity boxes.
Not such an easy ride for the sucker James O'Brien.
He took over Newsnight, and when he started slagging off Trump his feet didn't touch the ground.
I had to laugh.
For a lefty to get the boot from the BBC over bias takes some doing.
It was anti-Trump propaganda night after night.
The presenter then was the lefty Evan Davis who is very anti-Trump, but he survived because he ticked one of the BBC's diversity boxes.
Not such an easy ride for the sucker James O'Brien.
He took over Newsnight, and when he started slagging off Trump his feet didn't touch the ground.
I had to laugh.
For a lefty to get the boot from the BBC over bias takes some doing.
if it ever happened at Sky; i'd buy the kitten a pint
this naga, wont like it that boris never heard of her,she really is stuck up her own arse .
Harvey Proctor walks out of BBC Breakfast Time interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QPf9ws4xRE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QPf9ws4xRE
Unbelievable that the BBC were trying to mount any opposition at all to Harvey's outrage at this point.
Yet they were still trying to pick holes in his arguments. No wonder he walked out.
The BBC are part of the establishment gang. A horrible organisation.
Yet they were still trying to pick holes in his arguments. No wonder he walked out.
The BBC are part of the establishment gang. A horrible organisation.
poor Harvey should go on QT & try to get a right of reply from Fiona the Bruce
he's quite correct about the Beeb
he's quite correct about the Beeb
Proctor said on LBC last night, that the BBC had booked him for an interview 8 times on their Today programme, and 8 times they'd cancelled the interview at the last minute.
The BBC are obviously afraid of who he'd be putting on the spot. Cressida Di_ck for one there in fact.
The BBC are obviously afraid of who he'd be putting on the spot. Cressida Di_ck for one there in fact.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539