Media 59: BBC sees Labour’s increased vote share – 5%+ – as a disappointment

How would they describe the Conservatives’ corresponding loss of 5%+?

Thanks to a link sent from a Briton working in Uganda, we discovered The Canary, which focuses on news, ideas, and key developments that impact democracy, equality and fairness.


Its article opened by commenting that the BBC, as a citizen-funded media outlet, is rightfully expected to present information in an impartial manner.

Focussing on the 5 May local election, the BBC Political Editor, Laura Kuenssberg, and BBC Question Time were perceived to have placed a significant and inappropriate emphasis on attacking Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn.


At the time of writing, results from 79 out of 124 councils in England showed the Labour party to have lost only 22 seats – and this, considering previous comments from The Guardiansaying that even a loss of up to 50 seats would still be a good result for Labour, it seemed a decent performance.


Two vested and interests – pro-neoliberalism and pro-Israel – converged on an area of common interest: opposition to Jeremy Corbyn. This united bitter Blairites (sometimes referred to as Bitterites), Conservatives and pro-Israel groups – who ran perhaps the most toxic smear campaign against the Labour party and its leader in living memory.

In the run up to the local elections on May 5, the headlines across the BBC and wider media’s flagship television and radio programs ignored the struggling 10% in the UK – including 1 million people reliant on food bank; they were preoccupied with “the intrigue of the smear campaign”.

In true Political Concern vein, the Canary then focussed in detail on the vested interests of two executives responsible for hiring and directing the news teams, presenters and journalists who will report on matters of hacking, privacy, and the Middle East. Read more here.

The article summarises:

“These are not trivial conflicts of interests. The two individuals primarily responsible for driving the News and Politics agenda for the BBC, are instead driving forward their personal and professional causes – and the licence fee payer is footing the bill.

“And therein lies the rub with the role of the BBC, and the wider mainstream media, as a vehicle by which to advance the causes of those who own and run them. There is a monopoly of wealth and power in our society which translates directly into a monopoly of the media.

“The result is a staggering lack of diversity and pluralism of voices and opinions in the mainstream space. The media has become little more than a monotonous, relentless monologue – when as a country, and a world, we need to be having a conversation”.


Those willing to be cheered may now turn to two Watershed posts quoting from a better Guardian article sent in by a Birmingham Hall Green contact and selecting comments.





Posted on May 7, 2016, in uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: