The Newsroom

Blair Attacks the BBC

(September 2005)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
TR
TROGGLES
I can't imagine Downing Street not knowing about any of this in advance, so the question is what does Murdoch want from Blair for leaking Blairs feelings towards the BBC to the world?
Anyone who has the billions that Murdoch has and is prepared to own and triumph the Fox news channel can hardly be a respected figure in television? They just listen and report it because he owns the media which publish the story and has far too much power and money. Its about time he was brought down a bit.
PC
p_c_u_k
[quote="news woman"]
archiveTV posted:
In society now we seem to have these unrealistic expectations that mistakes shouldn't be made and we can prevent or avoid anything. But leaders are only human, the same as the rest of us.


At the same time reporters are only human, and if they travel to an area which has been devastated and witness people who don't appear to be given any help, that emotion can end up on-air.

The other issue here is the specific circumstances - whether the area was given the help it required because of race issues, the demonstration of the divide in America between those who could afford to get out and those left to fend for themselves - it was fair to point these matters out.

However I do think the reporting got a bit too opinionised at times. I would normally watch ITV rather than the BBC, and I detected this from their broadcasts. So what the BBC have done that ITV didn't I don't know, unless Blair just didn't watch them.
NE
Neil__
Hang on!

We have no definite proof that Blair said this, and even if he did, it's somewhat unethical of Murdoch to repeat a private conversation in this way.

Look at this:
Quote:
Mr Murdoch, who owns the Sun, the Times and News of the World newspapers and Sky Television, labelled the BBC a "government-owned thing".

He said people around the world were jealous of the US, and anti-Americanism was common throughout Europe.


So in fact, this is Murdoch (an adopted American and virulently anti BBC media mogul) using a private conversation as an excuse to bash a media rival.

Funny how no-one has commented on that aspect of it.
TR
TROGGLES
Neil Green posted:
Hang on!

We have no definite proof that Blair said this, and even if he did, it's somewhat unethical of Murdoch to repeat a private conversation in this way.

Look at this:
Quote:
Mr Murdoch, who owns the Sun, the Times and News of the World newspapers and Sky Television, labelled the BBC a "government-owned thing".

He said people around the world were jealous of the US, and anti-Americanism was common throughout Europe.


So in fact, this is Murdoch (an adopted American and virulently anti BBC media mogul) using a private conversation as an excuse to bash a media rival.

Funny how no-one has commented on that aspect of it.

Does Murdoch know what ethics are? He's interested in two things - money & power.
CA
cat
Brekkie Boy posted:
Though I've not seen much of the BBC coverage, I think the BBC are far more in touch with the general public in being "anti-American" than Blair's pro-USA stance!

In fact, I think Tony Blair is probably the only person in the country who actually likes America!


The point, though, is the BBC aren't supposed to be 'in touch' with any sentiment if they're trying to do objective journalism. It should be a case of facts, facts, facts and letting the public make their own minds up from the factual information they're giving.

For what it's worth, I though Matt Frei was excellent, and their coverage was a darn sight better than the mess they made of the tsunami. Blair is notoriously tetchy, so it's hardly a great shock.
NW
news woman
cat posted:
It should be a case of facts, facts, facts and letting the public make their own minds up from the factual information they're giving.


Ah, but in order to fill the vacuum that is now 24 hour media, journalism in the 21st century is now equally about speculation, opinion, comment and conjecture.

Politics is the prime example. Those such as Nick Robinson at the BBC don't sum up the story, they give their take on events...influenced by their sources of course.
TV
archiveTV
news woman posted:
archiveTV posted:
It wasn't the disaster that was the object of derision. It was the appalling response to it.


Who says it was appalling? Ah yes, the media - who are able at will to make a judgment on absolutely anything without having to take any of the responsibility! The media , who are such experts at handling responses to natural disasters...not. The media , who are desperate for new angles to keep the story going.

My point is that the overwhelming scale meant the response would take time and wouldn't happen overnight. This is an area the size of Britain for crying out loud! Remember too that at first they thought the damage wasn't too bad, until the river level rose and huge areas were flooded.

In society now we seem to have these unrealistic expectations that mistakes shouldn't be made and we can prevent or avoid anything. But leaders are only human, the same as the rest of us.


Well a large number of US politicians have condemned it. Even Bush has now admitted the response was woefully inadequate. The BBC has a duty to report that.

Correspondents also have a duty to report events on the ground. It's why they are correspondents and not just reporting wire copy. Mat Frie did a fabulous job, in incredibly bad conditions, explaining the situation in New Orleans and how large numbers of its inhabitants simply felt abandoned by their government.

PS. The NUJ has now entered the argument

Media Guardian
SK
S-k-y-o-n-e-f-a-n
good on him
NE
newsmonkey
I actually find it curious that the BBC is giving this story any credance at all - it's all 'he says that he said' chinese whispers!!!
MI
Michael
I'm surprised Fox News aren't all over it like a rash. This is classic John Gibson territory.
AN
Ant
Yep, Blair's admitted to it:

BBC News Article
TR
TROGGLES
Antz posted:
Yep, Blair's admitted to it:

BBC News Article

Saw him admit it on Marr's programme this morning - quite frightening - not that he told the truth for once but that comment... "you carry on do what you want to do" He has lost all touch of reality and believes that he can say or do what the hell he wants and its not important if its reported because I'm above everything.

Newer posts