Sometimes It’s Too Blatant To Let It Go

FireShot Capture 108 - Prince Andrew_ USA demands Duke faces_ -

Last night the story came out that the US Department of Justice would rather like a wee word or two with Prince Andrew regarding his connections with Jeffrey Epstein. Well, they have wanted to have a little chat with him for a while, but they actually filed a ‘Mutual Legal Assistance’ request. This “moves Andrew into the realms of a criminal investigation”.

Someone posted it on twitter last night and I asked for a source. Apparently The Sun broke the story (I’m not linking to them here) and it was later covered by the Metro, Sky News and others.

So I kept looking at the BBC website. Nothing.

And again this morning, nothing.

This potentially enormous story. Nothing.

Then I looked at the BBC page that covers the daily headlines in the newspapers. That link is the one for 8th June. Even though they normally cover The Sun and occasionally The Metro, there is nothing from them on the page. They preferred to mention something about Bugs Bunny in the Daily Mail.

Later on, a BBC story about it did come online. If you decide to read it, you may want to note that it is more or less ENTIRELY from the point of view of Andrew and his lawyers.

FireShot Capture 106 - Prince Andrew 'offered to help Jeffre_ -

Why the initial silence? Then why would they have decided to publish an article on it from that angle?

Do you think the BBC would do that for everyone? Or is it more likely that the defence of the British State is interwoven into the fabric of the BBC?

Here is an interesting little clip in that regard, a different situation, definitely, but a similar theme…

Discrimination in Action

TV news makes many sins of omission and other propaganda techniques are in there.

However, you often find much more propaganda, lifestyle propaganda, in other programs on TV.

This lifestyle propaganda is all about showing people what those that control the TV output believe to be acceptable behaviour.

Here we have a truly stunning example, with 4 adults ganging up to bully a 16 year old girl, and her father, who is watching, seems to be happy about it.

Stephen Nolan Is Not Your Daddy

441In the previous post I stated that things on Russia Today should be taken with caution, and I’ll happily stand by that.

It should also be noted that things on the BBC should also be taken with the deepest caution.

Here is a link to one of the worst interviews I have ever heard. Stephen Nolan of BBC Five Live is speaking to some members of a hacking group. The interview is prefaced with another interview which is there solely to make the listener feel hostile to the people who are then subsequently interviewed. The childishness is apparent from the first minute as before we get to the hackers we are encouraged to feel the pain of someone who likes computer games. This deep-rooted pain is because he couldn’t play online for a few hours.

After it has been established by the inconvenienced gamer that these evil-doers are doing much worse things than selling arms or starting illegal wars and so on, we then get to the hackers themselves.

Throughout the discussion Nolan adopts the style of a by turns angry or disappointed father, speaking to a child who just doesn’t quite get it.

It really is an extraordinary listen, and even the most ardent defenders of the BBC are going to have trouble with this one.

A youtube version of the interview has cut the preface, and gives a slightly different impression too.

Media studies gold, all of it.

The Pope Is A Catholic And The Queen Is A…

I think this might be the story some people are referring to at the moment.

Here’s Her Royal Neutralness not saying anything directly but the palace propagandists saying a whole lot…

In case you can’t be bothered reading the thing (I usually feel that way about the Sunday Times), the main part would be

a senior royal source said: “The queen is a unionist”.


Queen Is A  Unionist

Media Studies Friday – One – Writing Off Scotland

“The Daily Telegraph, The Times, The Daily Mail and The Daily Express – between September 18th last year and March 30th this year, there wasn’t a SINGLE editorial piece that framed independence positively. So there was absolutely no balance to the debate.”

Dr David Patrick

In the first of a new series, Media Studies Friday, which it will come as no surprise will be on Fridays, Dr David Patrick takes us through some of the coverage of the Referendum debate and how biased or unbiased it might have been.

Don’t Know Or Don’t Care

For me the title of this article explains the only two possibilities remaining about the coverage relating to the Scottish Independence debate on the BBC (London variety).

Either they are unaware of how this sort of thing sounds, or they simply don’t care much about a little bit of local trouble in the regions…

Why Always This Way?

a4_booYesterday the Scottish Green Party voted that in the event of Independence, there should be a separate Scottish currency. This vote shows that there is strength in depth at Yes Scotland as the groups within the umbrella organisation have shown their ability to represent a number of views and options that would be available after a Yes vote in next year’s referendum.

Would it come as a surprise to you that this positive reporting was NOT how the Scotsman covered the story.

Let’s try it with a much more neutral tone.

Yesterday the Scottish Green party internally voted for an independent Scottish currency in the event of a Yes vote in next year’s referendum. The Green party, who have only 2 MSPs and are therefore unlikely to be the sole arbiters of this decision given a Yes vote, are in line with many economists and activists in this view, though the SNP and other campaign groups such as Business for Scotland would prefer to keep UK sterling as the currency. 

I think that is a bit more factual but how do you think it was covered in the Scotsman?

Yes, you guessed it.. Shock! Horror! Disaster for Yes campaign!

Greens CurrencyThe decision to cover things in the way they do is an editorial decision, not a journalistic necessity.

Never forget it.

From Our Own Contrivement

When I was younger I used to document fluff pieces when I found them on TV or radio.

Partly due to the job I had then and partly for posterity, I would document and save the obvious propaganda pieces I saw – and sometimes use them in classes.

However, the sheer volume of it is obviously impossible to keep up with, and to be honest, it’s bad for the soul: “He who stares into the abyss…” and so on. Over the years, even though it annoys me, I have just learned to let it go.

Most of that stuff that I collected has been binned now. I would never have had time in a million years to write about it all.

However, sometimes you just can’t let it pass.

This morning I listened to the episode of “From Our Own Correspondent” from October 4th of this year called  A Tale of Two Termini (at time of writing it is the fourth one down on this page).

I’ll give you a rundown of the pieces in the episode…

  1. France bad (socialist [sic] president don’t you know), England good. France and England usually develop in a parallel way but now France bad France bad France bad (socialist president don’t you know), England better (has problems yes but no bad socialist president).
  2. Venezuela dangerous (Socialist president don’t you know), Chavez opponent good (even has “boyish charm” don’t you know). Socialists dangerous. Don’t wear wrong colours. 14 years of Socialist president is enough don’t you know?
  3. Assange bad (don’t you know). Wouldn’t he have been happier just “painting flowers?” – believe it or not that is more or less a quote. Oh and muslims bad don’t you know? Denmark cartoon guy better than Assange don’t you know?
  4. Communists were bad don’t you know? Stalin was bad, did bad things. Watch out for those communists and socialists. Bad Bad Bad.
  5. China Bad… or is it Good? Ah, they are just a little silly and culturally underdeveloped.

It has to be heard to be believed. I’m keeping it in case I am ever teaching media studies classes again.

[Cartoon from the Pleb]

For the Umpteenth Time…

I am not a member of the SNP but I am an independence supporter.

This is just a short post to show for the umpteenth time how the supposedly unbiased Scottish media tend to think about these things. This is from Lindsey Archibald of STV, who later removed the tweet but not before someone had done a screen grab….

Alasdair Campbell once called the Scottish Media “unreconstructed w@nkers” and some of them seem to wear that comment as a badge of honour.

However, as the above shows neatly enough, they have certainly been constructed in a way that supports the United Kingdom state,  even if they stick some tartan frills around the Nuclear sh*te that gets dumped in Scotland.

I probably prefer to use this picture that I made for them….