Kuenssberg and Balance

[BillyStubbsTears]

I thought she'd gone, but she's at it again. THE most useless political editor the BBC has ever had. The woman whose career was built on having Dominic Cummings on speed dial so she could blurt out whatever he told her to (like that flat out lie just before the 2019 Election that a Labour activist had assaulted a Tory worker outside a hospital).

Well she's back. She's presenting the story of how "political turbulence engulfed the UK" over the past few years.

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1701151214228922807

Politicians eh? You read that and it's clear that our politics is broken.

Except, when you read the article, it's NOT "politics". It's "Tory politics". Their ongoing civil war for control of a party that has lost any concept of what it is supposed to be doing. There's one mention of Labour in the entire piece, and that's a reference to them winning a mandate to govern 26 years ago.

The BBC establishment is so far up the Tory Party's arse that, even when they criticise them, the headline can't say they are criticising them. And that woman is the worst of the lot.

[BillyStubbsTears]

This ex-senior BBC reporter explains it far better than me.

https://bylinetimes.com/2022/03/30/laura-kuenssberg-bbc-political-editor-was-a-catastrophic-systemic-failure/

[Donnywolf]

Amazingly the BBC are biased against the Conservative Party (according to the Conservatives) and should be defunded

Amazingly the BBC are biased in favour of the Conservatives say everybody else

Kuennsberg does nothing imo to dissuade me of the latter but since the BBC News Channel admitted doctoring Johnson's GE Debate speech I don't watch it any more

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/nov/25/bbc-admits-mistake-in-editing-out-laughter-at-johnson-in-tv-debate

Remember that this is an article where the BBC are apologising for doctoring the speech not denying that they did it and was widely reported at the time

[BillyStubbsTears]

Kuenssberg is emblematic of the age.

The BBC used to have serious, weighty political reporters and interviewers. People like Robin Day and John Cole who would understand subjects and discuss them I'm a way that was designed to inform and educate.

Now it's all about froth. Started with the likes of Paxmam and Humphries and Neil who made it all about their egos - made it their job to trip up politicians over some issue of minutiae. That made political interviewing more entertainment than education. "Come and see the next useless lying bas**rd get tripped up and embarrassed!!!"

Then it morphed into not even being that deep. As that Byline Times article says, all that mattered for Kuenssberg was being first with a story. No analysis. No reflection. Just get it out and get the big shiny star for being first with the news. Even if the "news" was only whatever Cummings had fed you to serve his purpose. She is absolutely awful. Shallow, uninterested in truth and bored by detail. And she has given a free pass to a Government in her image.

[belton rover]

The BBC breakfast crews are the worst for this - mainly because they are not very good at it. Cringeworthy beyond belief. Breakfast news used to be quite a pleasant 20 minutes or so, but their sole intentions when interviewing politicians is to trip them up. It’s an awful watch nowadays.

[drfchound]

The BBC breakfast crews are the worst for this - mainly because they are not very good at it. Cringeworthy beyond belief. Breakfast news used to be quite a pleasant 20 minutes or so, but their sole intentions when interviewing politicians is to trip them up. It’s an awful watch nowadays.

It isn’t just the bbc though.
I watched a few minutes of the itv breakfast show a few days ago and the male and female presenters were interviewing an MP.
Their questioning techniques were truly embarrassing and rude, cutting in whenever the MP tried to answer them and not giving him a chance and then laughing about what had been said with the next person they had in the studio.

[SydneyRover]

Can anyone point to the UK politics section?

https://www.bbc.com/news

[belton rover]

The BBC breakfast crews are the worst for this - mainly because they are not very good at it. Cringeworthy beyond belief. Breakfast news used to be quite a pleasant 20 minutes or so, but their sole intentions when interviewing politicians is to trip them up. It’s an awful watch nowadays.

It isn’t just the bbc though.
I watched a few minutes of the itv breakfast show a few days ago and the male and female presenters were interviewing an MP.
Their questioning techniques were truly embarrassing and rude, cutting in whenever the MP tried to answer them and not giving him a chance and then laughing about what had been said with the next person they had in the studio.

Knowing some of the characters on ‘the other side’, I imagine it’s even worse on there.

I just listen to Radio 4 Extra in the morning now.

[Donnywolf]

Probably best all round as on Sky , ITV and I will assume BBC (still) the Presenters on the whole are poor and they match the answers given by their Interviewees when Politics is involved.

 

[Filo]

The BBC breakfast crews are the worst for this - mainly because they are not very good at it. Cringeworthy beyond belief. Breakfast news used to be quite a pleasant 20 minutes or so, but their sole intentions when interviewing politicians is to trip them up. It’s an awful watch nowadays.

It isn’t just the bbc though.
I watched a few minutes of the itv breakfast show a few days ago and the male and female presenters were interviewing an MP.
Their questioning techniques were truly embarrassing and rude, cutting in whenever the MP tried to answer them and not giving him a chance and then laughing about what had been said with the next person they had in the studio.

Knowing some of the characters on ‘the other side’, I imagine it’s even worse on there.

I just listen to Radio 4 Extra in the morning now.

So you don’t watch the BBC, but listen to it instead?

[belton rover]

The BBC breakfast crews are the worst for this - mainly because they are not very good at it. Cringeworthy beyond belief. Breakfast news used to be quite a pleasant 20 minutes or so, but their sole intentions when interviewing politicians is to trip them up. It’s an awful watch nowadays.

It isn’t just the bbc though.
I watched a few minutes of the itv breakfast show a few days ago and the male and female presenters were interviewing an MP.
Their questioning techniques were truly embarrassing and rude, cutting in whenever the MP tried to answer them and not giving him a chance and then laughing about what had been said with the next person they had in the studio.

Knowing some of the characters on ‘the other side’, I imagine it’s even worse on there.

I just listen to Radio 4 Extra in the morning now.

So you don’t watch the BBC, but listen to it instead?

Sorry if I wasn’t clear, Filo.
I don’t watch BBC breakfast any more, I listen to Radio 4 Extra. To programmes such as ‘Hancock’s Half Hour’, Kenneth Williams’ ‘Stop Messing About’, and ‘Steptoe and Son’

Not a political interview in hearing distance.

You should give it ago - it’s quite heart warming and might help you lighten up a bit.

[tommy toes]

The BBC breakfast crews are the worst for this - mainly because they are not very good at it. Cringeworthy beyond belief. Breakfast news used to be quite a pleasant 20 minutes or so, but their sole intentions when interviewing politicians is to trip them up. It’s an awful watch nowadays.

Sorry to say this but I completely agree Belton.
This morning the vacuous, useless, waste of space Sally whatsername was trying to trip up Angela Raynor about Labours plans regarding the triple lock, and failed.
And Kuennesberg, don't get me started on her.
Remember Corbyn defending her when delegates were booing her. He should have encouraged them to throw her out.

[scawsby steve]

The best for me by a country mile is Sky News. Jon Craig is an excellent political journalist, and Beth Rigby and Sophie Ridge are completely impartial interviewers.

The only one I don't care for is Kay Burley, who often has a pompous attitude to those she's interviewing. However, she came unstuck when she tried it on with Mick Lynch, and got taken to the cleaners.

[belton rover]

The BBC breakfast crews are the worst for this - mainly because they are not very good at it. Cringeworthy beyond belief. Breakfast news used to be quite a pleasant 20 minutes or so, but their sole intentions when interviewing politicians is to trip them up. It’s an awful watch nowadays.

Sorry to say this but I completely agree Belton.
This morning the vacuous, useless, waste of space Sally whatsername was trying to trip up Angela Raynor about Labours plans regarding the triple lock, and failed.
And Kuennesberg, don't get me started on her.
Remember Corbyn defending her when delegates were booing her. He should have encouraged them to throw her out.

Don’t be sorry, Tommy. I think it’s nice.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I didn't think I had it in me to despise her any more than I already did.

But this. This is absolutely disgusting.

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1701102798538957104


It's muckraking shite, masquerading as political analysis. Like someone says in the replies, it deliberately confuses honest professionalism with lack of impartiality.

She us an awful, awful example of how the BBC has lost its moral compass and standards, just when we needed it most.

[Branton Red]

I didn't think I had it in me to despise her any more than I already did.

But this. This is absolutely disgusting.

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1701102798538957104


It's muckraking shite, masquerading as political analysis. Like

Personally I think it's very telling and shines a, not particularly unsurprising, light on the events of the period in question.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Well Branton, you would, wouldn't you.

Are you still insisting that the BBC Economics Editor said Brexitvwas rubbish, and the officials in Brussels were congratulating themselves on making Britain a colony?

[Branton Red]

Well Branton, you would, wouldn't you.

Are you still insisting that the BBC Economics Editor said Brexitvwas rubbish, and the officials in Brussels were congratulating themselves on making Britain a colony?

Are you still failing to understand how the IMFs international comparisons of GDP growth are calculated to exclude the impact of exchange rate movements?

[BillyStubbsTears]

I'll answer that in my own time thank you.

I asked you those two questions many, many months ago. I assume you stand by those two assertions?

[Branton Red]

Just imagine if a very senior civil servant had said: -

1) "I decided to tell my colleagues, and let ministers know, that I had voted Conservative."

2) "I felt that they would assume that anyway" (i.e. that he's a Tory and that this should be expected as the case for all civil servants - otherwise by implication they'd be stupid)

3) When the journalist questions him on this re impartiality he states "I know" then makes up a lame excuse that....

....4) "I was trying to convey a message to a group of people who had mostly voted Tory as well"

Acceptable?

No of course not.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Lame excuse?

He was reminding colleagues "that their personal feelings were beside the professional point."

The very definition of civil service impartiality.

Now. Those other two points?

[Branton Red]

You believe that a very senior civil servant informing ministers and colleagues of how he voted is the "very definition of civil service impartiality."

My word!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Yeah OK. So our positions on this point are clear. I'll ask again, do you still stand by those other two points? Simple yes or no.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

I watched it, thought it was quite interesting.  On the civil service point, see the reaction on the documentary of other civil servants to that admission, that should be telling.

I don't mind her, she's not perfect nor the best but does an alright job with enthusiasm.  Prefer to Peston.

My grumble as said before is that the news becomes about these people not the content. Let the politicians talk.  I don't want to see Keir Starmer tripped up, I want to hear what his policies genuinely are and politicians are scared to go off script these days.

The documentary was as far from positive for the Tories as it gets frankly.

[Branton Red]

Yeah OK. So our positions on this point are clear. I'll ask again, do you still stand by those other two points? Simple yes or no.

I won't answer that question thank you. I think we've already discussed those two issues previously and our positions were clear.

Let's keep on topic and on the issue you yourself have raised.

I suspect you agree with the principle that civil servants should remain impartial and politically neutral? Please correct me if not.

However, in special circumstances, you believe that it is legitimate, in fact favourable, for a senior civil servant to declare to colleagues and ministers how he voted in a national election and his opinion on a particular political decision.

And what are those special circumstances? Ah yes when you agree with the said civil servant's vote and opinion.

You're even quick to agree with his excuse of "reminding colleagues that their personal feelings were beside the professional point." Even though this could obviously be done without declaring his own feelings and doing so is quite clearly counter-intuitive to the point he was supposedly making.

And the journalist that reports on an obvious breach of civil servant impartiality, though in the direction you approve of, is "absolutely disgusting", "muckraking shite".

This is where thinking through a blinkered ideology gets you and perfectly describes the root cause of the increasingly divisive nature of political discourse in this country.

Oh and on comparative GDP growth rates post Brexit - like you say you can respond in your own time. But I'm still waiting.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Here's the problem Branton.

If you insist that BBC Economics Editor Kamal Ahmed said (and meant as his opinion) that "Brexit is a bit rubbish" and was therefore clearly biased, and if you (as you did) maintain that opinion in spite of being clearly shown that WASN'T  him giving a biased personal opinion, its a bit difficult to credit you with having a sensible approach to debate.

And if you genuinely insist that there's a video of EU officials seriously claiming that they beat the UK and turned us into a colony, then that puts the cherry on top.

And it's late and I'm on a train down south for a meeting tomorrow, so forgive me if I just note that your suggestion that the IMF GDP figures I posted were PPP is wrong.

[Branton Red]

So to summarise

You believe it's perfectly justifiable for a senior civil servant to break one of the key principles of his role so long his beliefs tally with yours.

A journalist exposing such a breach of ethics is "absolutely disgusting", "muckraking shite".

And someone who fundamentally disagrees with you isn't simply wrong but so stupid that they are incapable of "having a sensible approach to debate"

Nice

And of course the figures YOU posted aren't converted using PPP - as I've explained before they show a fall in the £ currency versus the $ and the strong relative growth of the US economy. And nothing else. Yet you continued to maintain otherwise in spite of clearly being shown reality.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Branton.


I posted IMF figures.

You said  "The IMF statistics may be in constant dollars but they are converted into $ using Purchasing Power Parity not the prevailing exchange rate on the foreign currency markets."

But they aren't. At least not the IMF figures that I posted.

The IMF DOES publish PPP GDP data, but that's different to the data I posted.

Are you saying that the data YOU posted was PPP?