Thank heavens for the bottomless public purse

I caught an interview on the Radio 4 Today programme this morning with a spokesman for the Childrens Society. He seemed most exercised that so many children, around 700, had been held for between 8 and 10 (but 'a number' for up to 24 hours at Heathrow Airport. The children were held on suspicion of being trafficked or claiming asylum but the spokesman's main concern was that the conditions they were being held in were 'degrading'.

Some points struck me, first that although he was reminded that that the vast majority were held for 8-12 hours he kept saying that 'a number' were held for up to 24 hours. 'A number' - how many? 1 is a number.The second point was that he was calling for the children to be released from Heathrow Airport and sent to local authority care as soon as possible. Thank heavens for the bottomless public purse that can afford to house an infinite number of needy foreigners.

The BBC's coverage of the Labour and Conservative party conferences has been analysed

I knew Beeb Bias Craig would not let us down and he hasn't. On Biased BBC Craig has some very detailed analysis of the way the BBC Radio 4 Today programme covered the Labour and Conservative party conferences. It's a long but very rewarding read, here's the conclusion but do go and read the whole piece:

'A comparison of the 'Today' programme's coverage of the Labour Party and Conservative Party conferences reveals a significant degree of pro-Labour bias. Though only a few items, such as the Danny Shaw report, screamed 'bias!', the cumulative effect of the different moods established by the two respective presenters, the severe skewing of the commentariat towards the Labour Party, the unhelpfulness of the reports towards one party in particular, the presence of other unhelpful items towards that party (in contrast to a helpful one towards the other party), the framing of interviews, and the programme's initial agenda-setting (always followed through), all adds up to coverage that is much more favourable to one party than to another. I have tried to be as fair as fair can be towards the programme here but there is always the possibility that my own biases are blinding me to flaws in my own study. So, though I think I'm correct in all my judgements, please check the links (to whatever is still accessible on the 'Today' website) and see if you think I really am!

Of course, the question 'Does any of this really matter?' arises, especially when the Conservative Party itself shows little or no concern about biased BBC reporting. The related question 'Who cares?' may also cross your mind. (It crossed mine several times while writing this!) Still, the BBC has an obligation to impartiality and boasts that it is impartial. It it fails on that score, it must be called out. '

The BBC shamelessley set 'the narrative'

I find that I can only listen to 5 or 10 minutes of the BBC Today programme before the bias drives me to the off button. So this morning's 08:00 news should not have surprised me. Three articles set the pro-Labour 'narrative' nicely: first news that some UK manufacturing companies were bringing manufacturing back to the UK positive economic news), second a report that Gordon Brown was to deliver an upbeat New Years message (to contrast with Conservative pessimism/realism) and third that papers released under the 30 years rule showed how Margaret Thatcher wanted deeper cuts than her economic team (shamelessly linked to predictions about an incoming Conservative government).

Five minutes of radio that sum up the pro-Labour approach that the BBC Today programme takes and will increasingly push as a general election approaches. Five minutes, and an attitude, that the Conservative leadership need to address urgently, leaving it until after an election might be too long; the BBC need to be tackled about their blatant bias now.