So what's to come from this demo, anything? I don't see any discussion of it and the amount of trolling on the #nomoreausterity twitterfeed is beyond depressing.
but surely it is a big deal?, the big protest in Europe, France, Spain, etc are because the unions etc get behind them.
Is he still making childish prank phonecalls these days ? Or does he reserve his time for joining celebrity bandwagons.
Is he still making childish prank phonecalls these days ? Or does he reserve his time for joining celebrity bandwagons.
Earlier in the day, lots more people.
Incisive journalism at it's best!They put this up one hour ago (probably after numerous complaints.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27962963
One man and his dog.
Three sentences. Wow, the Beeb really pushed the boat out on that one.They put up this "mini story" one hour ago (probably after numerous complaints)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27962963
just called the BBC on 02087438000 and spoke to a nice chap who said he'd been inundated with calls about the Austerity Demo yesterday. He seemed generally interested to know why he was getting so many calls on a normally quiet Sunday morning so I explained the reason was that the BBC had failed to report anywhere, on TV or their websites, that 50,000 people started this march outside the BBC's London office. He gave me the number for Audience Services 03700100222 who answered reasonably quickly and asked what coverage I was complaining about. When I asked him to point me to ANY coverage, he was unable to do so, but he did tell me my complaint would be forwarded to management tomorrow morning. I think they need as many calls as possible to make sure they appreciate that we will not tolerate this indifference to what should have been a major story.
Britain's security services may need to be given greater powers ofsurveillance to monitor extremists from Isis when they return home to Britain from Iraq and Syria, the former defence secretary Liam Fox has said.
A majority of people will accept that an "ideological battle" means that the authorities will need greater powers to intercept the communications of extremists, Fox said.
The former defence secretary, who was speaking on the Andrew Marr Show on BBC1, said Britain should offer to put its airbases at the disposal of the US to avoid a "horrendous" situation in Iraq as Isis forces pose a threat to Baghdad.
Fox said: "There are those who say if we don't get involved, if we hunker down then we will be fine. There will be no backlash. That is utterly, utterly wrong because the jihadists don't hate us because of what we do. They hate us because of who we are. We can't change that. It is our values and our history that they detest more than anything else."
Fox said the authorities could deprive British citizens returning from Syria and Iraq of their passports. But he said the greatest effort should go towards increasing the power of the state to monitor the communications of extremists. He said: "We have the security services to ensure that they [extremists] are watched and that they don't pose a greater threat."
Asked whether the powers of the security services were insufficient, the former defence secretary said: "That is a real question that we are going to have to ask – whether the security services have adequate resources for an increased threat.
Don't forget the Scottish indyref stuff.IMO the BBC establishment bias is getting more and more nakedly apparent. It will take a while for it to reach the crescendo of Andrew Marr during the Iraq War, but the coverage of the Ukraine conflict, the consequences of austerity, the current Sunni uprising in Iraq and now this really does expose an obvious establishment bias.
Three sentences. Wow, the Beeb really pushed the boat out on that one.
No that'll be Jo Wiley Zane Lowe and198 tedious superlatives about'important sets'.But the BBC found £12million to send 275 of her beeboids on a little jolly to Brazil for the World Cup and I hear there are 300 beeboids going to Glastonbury
Or millions of people continuing to be aware of Russell Brand and whatever zany shit he does at the weekends.Brand's post about 'joyful revolution' is trending, so that is millions of people becoming aware of an event that the BBC basically ignored, the contrast will be glaring.
Just thought I'd share a story of what happened to a friend of mine and the BBC's response, as it fits the 'BBC News is not news' vibe down to a tee:
" BBC East Midlands Today sent a team to follow a teacher friend of mine on strike day. They spent the whole time trying to bait her into saying things that would make her come across as unsympathetic, to make the strike appear to be about nothing more than money. She didn't bite...so they didn't run the piece!
I complained to them about the agenda they appeared to be working to and their response: "We reflect the views of our audience, whether they're positive or negative."
So there you have it, straight from the horse's mouth: BBC News, not here to inform, just to reinforce what the majority of their audience already believe."
“We covered this demonstration on the BBC News Channel with five reports throughout Saturday evening, on the BBC News website on Sunday, as well as on social media. We choose which stories we cover based on how newsworthy they are and what else is happening and we didn’t provide extensive coverage because of a number of bigger national and international news stories that day, including the escalating crisis in Iraq, British citizens fighting in Syria and the death of Gerry Conlon.
We frequently report on the UK economy and what it means for the British public. We also reflect the concerns of people such as those demonstrating, and others who hold opposing views, across our daily news output on TV, radio as well as online, and we also explore them in more depth including in our political programming and current affairs investigations, debates on ‘Question Time’ and during interviews and analysis on programmes such as ‘PM’ and ‘Newsnight’. Inevitably, there may be disagreements over the level of prominence we give to stories, but we believe our coverage of this subject has been fair and impartial.”
One weird thing in journalism is being expected to give multiple sides of an argument even if one side (like the government) can't be arsed turning up and leaves them to make their arguments for them.
So I could understand that, but this reached way beyond that to flat-out establishment dick-sucking. It really did sound like a mobster warning.
Not sure what you mean there.
I've noticed Nick Robinson reporting on the hacking trial has been giving a reasonably fair 'on one hand this' analysis. But Jesus how far has BBC current affairs sunk when you note that one of its correspondent is making an effort to sound like a BBC Oxbridge liberal instead of just a Tory jerk sock.Was listening to R4 this morning (very early this morning) and they had a political editor comment on the Coulson verdict.
Apparently Labour shouldn't mention it because it would be..."parochial" to bring it up, given all the big things going on in the world.
...riiiiight. Wonder how long he spent scraping the barrel to think of that one.