No.
Caroline Spelman is on the morally and socially conservative wing (such as there still is in the Commons) of the Conservative Party, with links to things like CARE. Attacking people like that (and Eurosceptics, again such as there still are, or ever were, in the Commons) is exactly what David Cameron wants.
The BBC's target is not the Conservative Party as such; it is the conservatives who are still inexplicably members of the Conservative Party.
It used to do the same thing to the Labour Left.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You keep saying "the BBC" like it's a homogeonous organisation. But of course it isn't - it's made of up of hundreds of editors, producers etc of differing levels of seniority.
ReplyDeleteSo how does "the BBC" decide to cover anything? Do they have meetings in which these strategies to "back Blair", "back Cameron" "attack Spelman" etc are discussed? And how time consuming must it be for one central body to regulate the entirety of the ouput of all BBC jounrlists across different forms of media 24/7? You seem very well informed, so how is it done? How many people make these decisions and enforce them? What happens if an individual news editor disagrees? Are these decisions binding?
"Do they have meetings in which these strategies to "back Blair", "back Cameron" "attack Spelman" etc are discussed?"
ReplyDeleteClearly, to anyone watching or listening to the output.
"how time consuming must it be for one central body to regulate the entirety of the ouput of all BBC jounrlists across different forms of media 24/7?"
Not in the least. Anyone would ever run the slightest risk of stepping out of line for any "regulation" to be necessary. So it isn't. Again, don't you ever watch or listen to the BBC?
"How many people make these decisions and enforce them?"
Make them, extremely few. No "enforcement" is needed.
"What happens if an individual news editor disagrees?"
The BBC would never be employing such a person in the first place.
"Are these decisions binding?"
If you like. But nobody needs to be "bound".
Seriously, don't you ever switch it on?
This story is the work of Michael Crick - who cut his teeth reporting on the Militant Tendency within Labour...
ReplyDeleteWell, indeed.
ReplyDeleteMilitant barely existed beyond Merseyside. It was far smaller than the International Socialists (now the SWP - of course, I know that you know this; but other people might not) or the International Marxist Group (whatever happened to the International Marxist Group?).
Yet much of the New Labour mythology is based on the "defeat of Militant". It is therefore easy to ignore that the fact that New Labour is itself wholly the work of utterly unrepentant old Stalinists, Trotskyists and fellow-travellers from that period.