Why would the BBC prefer to major on alleged Tory sleaze from one year around ten years ago rather than Labour sleaze over more than five years during the last eight years?
Michael Crick has raised 32 questions about the Caroline Spelman case on his Newsnight blog, the comments show that most people are not fooled by this distraction device. Here are a few extracts:
"What about the questions that Michael Crick should answer?
Should he really have broken an 11 year old story with such little evidence, which looks to be based on very unfair misleading questioning of the nanny?"
"Were this a current affair I would support such questioning. However this is way way too old to care about now. From reports she and her party behaved reasonably to find and correct something that 'looked' wrong.
Given the fast movement over this issue in the last year or so, the possible shredding of expense documentation, NOW, this is a complete non story and only appears to be gross anti Conservative in house bias from the BBC.
I equally have no interest in 10 year old expense irregularities from times with different atmospheres on the issue from any party. Find a scandal of Harold Wilson's expenses, just bin it no one cares now.
Oh and MEPs, we all know the EU is corrupt, that is what we expect! They can not even sign off their accounts!
This all 'looks' like a plan devised after the crushing of Labour in the local elections by the BBC to shore up their soul mates."
"Another question for Mr Crick:
Why did you miss the Labour MPs paying their insurance premiums from their allowances and dig this old news up?
You have clearly nailed your political colours to the mast Mr Crick, and seriously damaged your credability."
"Ah the Salem Witch trials continue with Michael Crick as the Witchfinder General.
Shame he does not apply his diligent approach to Beckett, Blair, Brown, Harman etc.
Need I say more?
Clearly the TV Licence is being wasted once again. Time to franchise out the BBC Current Affairs Dept!"
"The great Michael Crick (pbuh) brings the searchlight of truth onto a 10 year old story
Given that there are 650-odd current MPs to investigate plus MEPs and MSPs why are you spending so much time on Ms Spelman?
Perhaps you might like to consider investigating the entire Kinnock family?
Where did the tip-off come from, eh?"
"So what questions are to be put to ed balls and yevette cooper - about their remote holdiay home suddenly becoming their 'main residence'.
They live in london and that is where their kids go to school. So why is their london house now consdered their 'second home' so being paid for by the taxpayer?
What about the massive mortgage x,00% the blairs used to launch their property empire?
Is there anyone at the BBC who has any independance?"
The BBC are in full attacking the Tories mode in a, hopefully, vain attempt to stop the Labour vote dropping any further. Quite how this is in any way the proper function of the UK's independent by charter national broadcaster I am not sure.
1 comment:
It isn't the BBC's proper function at all -- although perhaps it might have been worth noting in passing as just one background detail while dealing with the current big issue, naming names and quoting all known facts and figures about all of those in current or recent news on this subject.
In other words, the Labour lot and Derek Conway would have hundreds of times the coverage that the Spelman non-issue would receive.
Any outfit that didn't do that is, by definition, biased in its reporting, and needs to be dealt with. Is there no provision for taking formal action against the Corporation (including named individuals) under its Charter? Perhaps a legal eagle ought to look into that very question.
Post a Comment