Banner

General

By a Newsnet reporter
 
The Salmond/Murdoch story continues to rumble on in the Scottish media.  In keeping with previous attacks on the First Minister Scottish Labour are demanding another inquiry.
 
The internal email sent by a News Corp employee suggesting the First Minister would be available to speak to Jeremy Hunt whenever News Corp wished has led to accusations that Mr Salmond had hatched an agreement with Rupert Murdoch.

The claim from Labour, and other Unionist parties, is that the Sun’s subsequent support for the SNP just before the 2011 Hollyrood election was as a result of a deal hatched between Alex Salmond and Rupert Murdoch which required Mr Salmond to lend his support to News Corp’s BskyB bid.

There is no evidence for such a deal.  The email constantly referred to is a third hand interpretation of communications between a News Corp employee and Mr Salmond’s advisor, Geoff Aberdein.

The email states: "I met with Alex Salmond's advisor today.  He will call Hunt whenever we need him to."

Mr Salmond has already acknowledged that he did indeed plan to speak to UK Minister Jeremy Hunt about the BskyB bid and has given as his reason as investment and jobs he believed would accrue to Scotland. 

Scottish Labour say they do not believe the First Minister.  With no evidence to the contrary any further accusations against Mr Salmond are just that – accusations.  It is at this point that an honest press should begin to demand evidence from Labour, who appear to hop from accusation to accusation.

However this lack of evidence hasn’t stopped the Scottish media.  They continue to peddle Labour inspired innuendo, speculation and baseless accusation to the extent that it has now taken over the Scottish political narrative.

But if one returns to the Leveson emails, there is another email that hasn’t been given much publicity.  This email, on first reading appears to damn the First Minister, and one is left puzzled as to why his political opponents and journalists haven’t pounced on it as clear evidence to back their claims.

Newsnet Scotland has reproduced the email below:

It’s dynamite, or at least it looks that way.  Surely this is the evidence Labour has been looking for that nails Salmond fair and square.

However keen eyed observers will have noticed something; the date of the email.  It was sent on March 2nd 2011, almost three weeks after the 'Aberdein' email, by which time Scottish Labour claim that a secret deal has already been agreed between Salmond and Murdoch that will see the Scottish Sun support the SNP.

The email was sent two months after a January meeting between Mr Salmond and James Murdoch and three years after the First Minister last met Rupert Murdoch.

The email demonstrates clearly that Labour's claims are baseless.  This email actually destroys the claims that the Scottish Sun’s support of the SNP had anything to do with previous meetings between any of the Murdochs and Alex Salmond.

For if any agreement was already in place then there would be no need for the editor of the Scottish Sun to make a pitch to the editorial team arguing that the Scottish Sun should get behind the SNP’s re-election bid.

The email also confirms the thing that drives Alex Salmond in his dealings with big business – the wellbeing of those over whom he represents and governs.  According to the email, the key issue discussed with the Sun’s editor was the impact of EU Fisheries policy on Scottish fishing communities.

Mr Salmond’s confirmation in this email of his stance on the BskyB bid is just that, confirmation of something his aide Geoff Aberdein had already alluded to.  Indeed another as yet unpublished email mentions Mr Salmond being “very keen” to put forward the economic arguments for Scotland with relation to the bid.

The existence of the ‘pitch’ email at a stroke destroys the line being pushed by the Scottish media of a ‘cosy’ relationship between Salmond and Murdoch that led to a secret quid-pro-quo deal where the SNP received positive coverage in return for Salmond’s backing for the BskyB bid.

It also calls into question the motives of those within the Scottish media, and the BBC, who were certainly aware of this email, yet still decided to run with Labour’s completely vacuous smears and innuendo.

One of these is a certain Gary Robertson who on Friday conducted what can only be described as one of the most hostile interviews ever witnessed on Radio Scotland.

In an episode peppered with hectoring interruptions, Mr Robertson jettisoned any and all pretence of impartiality and a desire to establish facts and instead took an increasingly aggressive stance against Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

Gary Robertson interviewing Nicola Sturgeon

The Sun, contrary to Gary Robertson's claim, was not supporting the SNP at the time of the 'Aberdein' email - the Sun editor was yet to make his pitch to the editorial team.  Indeed Mr Robertson, at one point, actually quotes from the above 'pitch' email but does not mention that the Sun has yet to adopt an editorial line supporting the SNP.

Mr Robertson struggles to form any coherent line of questioning throughout the interview, at one point pressing Ms Sturgeon on what he describes as “perception” followed by a quite pathetic question on the referendum date.

The irony is that the perception referred to by the BBC Scotland presenter is one that results from smear and innuendo.  The very innuendo broadcast for two full days by Mr Robertson and his colleagues – the Labour claims and accusations that were devoid of any evidence.

The chain of emails make for remarkable reading and one is left in no doubt that Jeremy Hunt’s cabinet position is almost certainly untenable.

The contrast between Scottish Labour’s smears and Labour’s approach south of the border, where Ministerial wrongdoing is the focus, is stark.  There is very real evidence that Jeremy Hunt may have behaved inappropriately.

Scottish Labour on the other hand have no such Ministerial wrongdoing to complain about.  Thus they have used the few references to Alex Salmond in the chain of emails in order to make baseless accusations knowing that the Scottish media will be only too happy to run them. 

The agenda is simple, it is to create a perception that Alex Salmond’s relationship (if we can call it that) with Rupert Murdoch is unhealthy and with it discredit any support the Scottish Sun may offer the SNP.

However if we turn away from Mr Salmond, the Leveson emails also reveal others keen for the BskyB deal to go through because of its apparent benefit to Scotland.  One email makes mention of a Lib Dem MP (probably MSP Jim Tolson) who it is claimed will lobby Vince Cable on the matter, the Scottish Lib Dems, then led by Tavish Scott, are also said to be supportive.

In page 42 of the email chain Nick Clegg’s advisor is said to have spoken of the importance in getting Labour on board and of the need to support Nick Clegg when he makes an announcement that “goes against an election promise”.

Other communications include claims that Nick Clegg was furious with Vince Cable after the latter’s public intervention into the BskyB bid.  In page 43 of the emails there is a sensational claim that Vince Cable is about to be “blackmailed”.

David Cameron’s advisor is said to have extended an invitation to News Corp to attend a meeting with Minister Chris Huhne and Number 10 for News Corp to present their strategy.

The emails are explosive and implicate senior coalition Ministers.  That we in Scotland are ignoring these stories and instead wading through politically motivated smears tells us all we need to know about the state of Scotland’s main stream media.

Comments  

 
# doonhamer 2012-04-29 16:07
After reading this story, I am sure we will see the all the mainstream media lining up to offer their apologies for the smears and innuendo. Aye Right.
 
 
# Dundonian West 2012-04-29 16:16
"One of these is a certain Gary Robertson who on Friday conducted what can only be described as one of the most hostile interviews ever witnessed on Radio Scotland."
"In an episode peppered with hectoring interruptions, Mr Robertson jettisoned any and all pretence of impartiality and a desire to establish facts and instead took an increasingly aggressive stance against Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon."

I heard that interrogation/hectoring tantrum and it FRIGHTENED me.
The stereotypical Scottish male at his most boorish,and NOT getting his own way.
Yes,frightening .
A disgrace to the BBC.
 
 
# CharlieObrien 2012-04-29 17:04
A disgrace to the BBC the BBC is a disgrace as it actively encourages this behaviour,and as far as I heard instructs its staff to degenerate the SNP.The BBC is a disgrace.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 17:27
"one of the most hostile interviews ever witnessed on Radio Scotland"? He tried to get an answer to a question and Nicola tried to avoid answering it. This was no different from any political interview you might hear on the Today programme or Newsnight. The stereotypical modern political interviewer, persisting - politely and calmly - with a tricky question and refusing to be diverted from it, and the stereotypical politician trying to put out their own message rather than answer the tricky questions. The days are long gone when interviewers asked "Prime Minister, is there anything you want to tell the nation?", nor are interviewers prepared to let media-savvy politicians spin an answer off into a different area where they're comfortable. Robertson didn't raise his voice, he didn't take a position, he didn't 'bully', he didn't lose his temper or throw a tantrum, he simply tried to get an answer to his question by repeating it and by interrupting Nicola when she was clearly avoiding answering it. That's how it's done for politicians of all parties and by practically every radio and TV interviewer. Nicola could have dealt with it better by explaining why the question was nonsense - or by giving a straightforward answer to it - but she didn't. Any failure in that interview was hers, not Robertson's.

There is undoubted bias in BBC Scotland's output (as there is at the national level). This wasn't it.
 
 
# roguesquadron 2012-04-29 17:43
Yeah I agree, it wasn't particularly hostile. Pretty much what we're used to hearing from any interviewer with any politician.

Whole Salmond/Murdoch thing is a storm in a teacup.
 
 
# Clydebuilt 2012-04-29 22:30
Quoting Jiggsbro:
" he simply tried to get an answer to his question by repeating it and by interrupting Nicola when she was clearly avoiding answering it. That's how it's done for politicians of all parties and by practically every radio and TV interviewer. Nicola could have dealt with it better by explaining why the question was nonsense - or by giving a straightforward answer to it - but she didn't. Any failure in that interview was hers, not Robertson's.


Rubbish! Nicola wasn't allowed to speak 5 words sometimes. that's a common bbc Scotland technique for interviewing SNP representatives . The First Minister and the deputy first minister are never treated with even a modicum of respect by the BBC. Unlike the Prime Minister or Chancellor.
"Nicola never gave a straight forward answer" Utter rubbish all her answers were straight forward. She did try to explain why the questions were wrong, Robertson didn't want to know.

Personal attack on another poster removed - NNS Mod Team
 
 
# nchanter 2012-04-29 22:31
Quoting Dundonian West:
"One of these is a certain Gary Robertson who on Friday conducted what can only be described as one of the most hostile interviews ever witnessed on Radio Scotland."
"In an episode peppered with hectoring interruptions, Mr Robertson jettisoned any and all pretence of impartiality and a desire to establish facts and instead took an increasingly aggressive stance against Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon."

I heard that interrogation/hectoring tantrum and it FRIGHTENED me.
The stereotypical Scottish male at his most boorish,and NOT getting his own way.
Yes,frightening .
A disgrace to the BBC.

Why do we accept in your face interrogation as good journalism, does every one thing Paxman is clever. The journalist of today interrupt so mach , the viewer/listener does not get to hear the answers to the questions, or are answers not important.
 
 
# Big Eye 2012-04-29 16:22
Doubt we will see any apologies and I think it is time we started a campaign to get the right for unbiased coverage from our media, particularly from the publicly owned BBC.

The first step might be to involve some international organisations in the campaign. The heritage organisation in the USA PUBLISH FREEDOM RANKINGS it may be an idea to contact them and get them to examine the actions of the BBC and other media outlets in Scotland. They were super critical of the media in Eastern Europe before the collapse of the Soviet Union and what is happening is Scotland today is very similar.
 
 
# tartanpigsy 2012-04-30 01:09
Big Eye, can you contact the Demonstrate FB page, all ideas on how to create greater exposure on this topic are welcomed with a demonstration at Pacific Quay due on 26th May.
www.facebook.com/.../

on the subject of the interview on GMS, surely if Gary Robertson knowingly quoted from an email that shattered the story he was trying to make stick, then he is guilty of false manipulation of the facts, and, if that is the case, that is a most definite example of BBC Bias as his show production team must have known too. ???????
 
 
# mutterings 2012-05-02 15:57
Quoting tartanpigsy:
ideas on how to create greater exposure on this topic are welcomed

I'll be maintining a central events repository in the run-up to the referendum:
my.mutterings.co.uk/politics

I have added the BBC demo to the events list.

I am not on Facebook myself, so it would be great if someone could let me know once the exact time is known.


I've been lurking here for months - great source of information!
 
 
# Jim Johnston 2012-04-29 16:35
Anything less than another SNP landslide victory will no doubt be reported on Friday morning by the BBC and "Scottish" MSM as proof positive that Independence has been killed "Stone dead" as Robertson famously claimed, and the referendum should be dropped immediately !!!

In their FUD dreams.
 
 
# D_A_N 2012-04-29 18:54
exactly. They keep saying a vote for SNP on these local elections is a vote for indy. But the thing is.. If SNP do have a landslide, I can assure you they will state that this is not anything to do with independence. lol..

Oh god I hope we take Glasgow. We've been working very hard for it.
 
 
# km 2012-04-29 17:01
Just listened to the interview with Gary Robertson. Got to say that I think Nicola missed a trick there. Robertson kept on going about "the perception" - she should have turned it round and said, "It may be your perception, Gary, and the perception of the unionist parties who will do everything they can to try to smear the First Minister with innuendo, but we believe the Scottish people are more concerned with jobs than innuendo".
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 17:30
Quite. She had one line prepared for dealing with that question, which only tried to deflect from it rather than tackle it, and Robertson rightly persisted with it.
 
 
# peter,aberdeenshire 2012-04-29 19:28
Quoting Jiggsbro:
Quite. She had one line prepared for dealing with that question, which only tried to deflect from it rather than tackle it, and Robertson rightly persisted with it.

I disagree, did you hear the interview with Malcolm Bruce about half an hour before? not much hectoring and interruptions there, have you ever heard a Labour politician being interviewd in this way?
If somebody spoke to my wife, mother etc in that manner I would be sorely tempted to alter the pitch of his voice!!, not that I am condoning violence in any shape or form!!!. Call me old fashioned but that was no way to talk to any woman.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 19:51
Quoting peter,aberdeens hire:
I disagree, did you hear the interview with Malcolm Bruce about half an hour before? not much hectoring and interruptions there, have you ever heard a Labour politician being interviewd in this way?


I didn't hear the Bruce interview,so I don't know whether or not he tried repeatedly to avoid answering a difficult question. Perhaps you do. But I have heard, frequently, politicians of all parties being interviewed in a similar - and often more impolite - manner.

Quoting peter,aberdeens hire:
If somebody spoke to my wife, mother etc in that manner I would be sorely tempted to alter the pitch of his voice...Call me old fashioned but that was no way to talk to any woman.


Nicola Sturgeon is a politician, and a politician in government at that. She was spoken to in the same way that male politicians in government, of all parties, are regularly spoken to by political interviewers of all broadcasters. Neither the SNP nor female politicians have a right to any special treatment. A government cannot expect to avoid answering difficult questions by fielding a female minister to be interviewed, nor can they cry foul when their female ministers are interviewed as robustly as their male ministers. Nicola Sturgeon is a government minister first, a politician second and a woman only incidentally. Women are just as capable as men in government and there is no reason to patronise them by handling them with kid gloves or treating them in any way differently to men. If your wife or mother were in government, I would expect them to face the same tough questioning as Nicola. I would want them to: The role of the media in holding the government to account, and trying to find answers to difficult and uncomfortable questions, is vital in a healthy democracy. If the media were to refuse to pursue difficult questions with a government minister because she was a woman, that would be an insult to democracy and an insult to women.
 
 
# peter,aberdeenshire 2012-04-29 19:59
I still disagree with you, that was not tough questioning and if you truly believe that Labour politicians are interviewed in this way then please find a link to one on radio Scotland and let me hear it. I listen to radio Scotland every day and have heard many interviews with both Labour and SNP and the difference is night and day.
If my wife or mother were involved in politics I would still take exception to a man, any man addressing a woman in that manner, if you think that is patronising then once more we would have to disagree.
The role of the media is not to hold the government to account, it is to report the news in a fair and unbalanced manner, once more if you think this is being done then once more we seem to disagree.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 20:08
You can hear government ministers being held to account in a similar way most days of the week on the Today programme or Newsnight. You'd have been able to hear Labour ministers being treated similarly when they were in government (in Scotland or the UK) and you can hear Tory and LibDem ministers being interviewed in a similar style now. You're unlikely to hear a Scottish Labour MSP being interviewed in the same manner at the moment, because they're not in government. You're unlikely to hear a female government minister being treated differently to a male government minister because, thankfully, we have largely accepted that men and women are equal; equal rights, equal pay, equal opportunities and equally held to account as government ministers. And held to account by the news media, who do more than report the facts. They try to establish what those facts are, often by asking difficult questions of ministers who might want to avoid those facts being known.

I do not want to live in a Scotland where the government is not asked difficult questions, nor a Scotland where women are not treated as the equal of men. Come independence, we can all help shape a new Scotland. I rather hope your view is in the minority, or we will have a very unhealthy democracy and a very unhealthy attitude to equality.
 
 
# peter,aberdeenshire 2012-04-29 20:20
Yes I am all for equal pay and rights etc, Nicola Sturgeon is a very capable politician, and being held to account is all well and good. As I said I personally have yet to hear a Labour politician of any level being interviewed in such a hostile manner by the BBC in Scotland, but as I also said if you can find a link to such an event then please post a link.
I look forward to a Scotland where all views and opinions are treated equally, even the ones you do not agree with.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 20:33
You're clearly not in favour of equality if you expect special treatment for female ministers.
As for examples of Labour ministers being interviewed similarly on Radio Scotland: Labour have not been in power since 2007 and I don't listen to Radio Scotland. I have no idea whether the BBC has archived RS material from pre-2007, nor am I likely to trawl through it for examples of Labour ministers being interviewed in exactly the same way as practically every broadcast journalist interviews practically every government politician. Try searching for Paxman on Youtube; you'll find footage of him interviewing government ministers of both genders and all parties, and usually in a far more robust style. Try using iPlayer to listen to last week's Today programmes on R4. You'll hear government ministers being interviewed in a similar way: the same way as they were when Labour were in power.

If you genuinely never heard a Scottish Labour government minister being interviewed robustly on Radio Scotland, then I'm inclined to believe you have selective amnesia or that you began listening to RS in 2007.
 
 
# peter,aberdeenshire 2012-04-29 21:00
A ok so you dont listen to radio
Scotland, the thing is my point is about the bias evident at Radio Scotland which I do listen to, every single morning and thus am able to form the opinion that it treats Labour politicians differently from SNP politicians. All I asked for was proof that this was not so.
As for your assertion that I am not in favour of equality, unless we have met personally and had an exchange of views then that is just supposition on your part. I have viewd Paxman on youtube and in real time, how exactly is that relevant to the bias of BBC Scotland exactly?
It seems that you question those who do not share your view of the world we live in, I can assure I am quite at ease with my views on equality, and also on my mental health, slective or not, and considering I have been in the type of employment that I am for the last twenty years which menas listening to the radio most mornings I can assure you I have been listening to RS since way before 2007.
 
 
# Clydebuilt 2012-04-29 22:38
peter

don't get your self wound up with
Jiggsbro. He hasn't made one drop of sense.
It's hard to think of a positive reason why he or she is on this site.
 
 
# deepwater 2012-04-30 13:16
I'm still waiting for that audio link :-)
 
 
# millie 2012-04-29 20:32
I ‘never’ heard Jim Murphy or Douglas Alexander, Alistair Darling etc. being interviewed in this manner (when they were in government) by the BBC in Scotland, (London BBC perhaps?).

Equally, interviews with Michael Moore (government) which have been conducted by BBC Scotland post May 11 landslide have been fawning in nature- with the odd bit of faux interrogation.

With regard to Gary Robertson, his questioning style comes over as quite infantile.
 
 
# Briggs 2012-04-29 21:45
I remember Johan Lamont standing on the steps of The City Chambers in George Square being interviewed by Isabel Fraser from the studio.

She was almost catatonic with nerves and was incredibly poorly prepared to answer questions.

She was a prime subject to be 'kebabbed' by the interviewer, but was not.

Was this a woman being kind to someone of the same gender in distress, or a BBC interviewer being kind to a Labour leader?

Nicola is well able to look after herself, but Johan isn't .........why the disparity in treatment?
 
 
# G. P. Walrus 2012-04-29 22:22
The BBC have aggressively interviewed Labour ministers when they were in power in Holyrood. For example, Gordon Brewer absolutely destroyed Jack McConnell over his proposals on Council Tax bands during the 2007 election campaign.

For the record, I dislike Gary Robertson because his main tactic is to continually interrupt and put nasty little twists on what people say. It is not particularly clever or enlightening for the listener but I don't think he was treating Nicola especially harshly on this occasion. I do think she handled it exceptionally well.
 
 
# nchanter 2012-04-29 22:40
Well I want to live in a civilized Scotland where courtesy and good manners still count, a standard where the paxmans have no power to sway opinions.If a question is important enough to ask then the answer is also important to hear. There is a big difference between interviewing and interrogation.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 22:52
If a question is important enough to ask, then the answer is important enough to insist on. If that means the interviewer interrupting a politician who is repeatedly trying to give the same evasive non-answer, then so be it. I'd rather an interviewer be 'rude' to a politician than a politician be able to avoid the important questions.

Nicola Sturgeon was refusing, repeatedly, to answer a difficult question. Robertson repeated the question and interrupted her when it was clear she was repeating her previous non-answer. Nicola Sturgeon was treated the way every government minister is treated (and has been treated for years).

Your 'civilised' Scotland would be one where politicians control the media, by controlling what questions the media could ask. I don't think there's any room for that sort of control in a democracy. I want a media that challenges government on our behalves and asks them the awkward questions. I don't want a media that simply acts as a ministry of information for government.

An independent Scotland might not be governed by the SNP. It might be governed by a party you don't support, who pursue policies and actions you don't approve of. If that happens, would you rather that ministers were asked the awkward questions about those policies or allowed to spout propaganda without being challenged?
 
 
# Suomi 2012-04-29 17:10
I believe that Nicola did challenge Robertson's idea of perception.Whatever,it is difficult when a so called interviewer adopts an in- your -face style(involving constant interuptions), to follow the responses of the interviewee.Irrespective of whether the BBC is biased or not,they do need to sort out the tendency of some of their staff to talk over the respnses of those who they are interviewing.Under the circumstances,I thought that Nicola Sturgeon did well.I liked her suggestion that Roberstson should listen to the answer,which of course he ignored.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 19:57
The BBC's interviewers - in common with every other UK broadcaster - regularly interrupt politicians...when the politician is avoiding answering a question and either answering a different question or - as Nicola was - endlessly repeating themselves. It wasn't difficult to follow her responses because it was clear that we'd already heard her response to the tricky question and it didn't address the question. Robertson rightly pursued an answer. He'd already listened to the answer once. It's not his job to allow a government minister to repeat, ad nauseam, a non-answer and thus avoid a difficult question. It's his job - which I have no reason to suppose he did differently with Nicola than with Labour ministers when they were in government - to hold politicians to account and press them for answers on questions they try to avoid.
 
 
# Peter A Bell 2012-04-29 17:12
I stand to be corrected on this, but while Alex Salmond has stated that he was prepared to speak to Jeremy Hunt about the BSkyB bid, to the best of my knowledge he has never stated that he intended to speak in favour of the bid.
 
 
# Macart 2012-04-29 17:16
Good article and fully agree with the conclusion on the state of the debate as presented by the msm in Scotland.
 
 
# Robert Louis 2012-04-29 17:16
It is clear after this week, that the BBC seem to be leading the smears against Alex Salmond.

I do not know how any of the so called 'journalists' at the BBC can live with themselves.

My point is this, even if they disagree with the politics of the SNP, their role as supposedly impartial 'journalists' in a DEMOCRACY is to report facts, and NOT to 'play ball' with dirty filthy attempts by the liars of Labour to mislead and smear the SNP and the First Minister. Incidentally, how does the BBC decide what to mislead Scottish voters on regarding the SNP?? Does someone else tell them to do it??

This matter of Slamond/Murdoch has been literally done to death by the BBC, and despite them having ALL the facts, which incidentally are in the public domain, they carry on running and running with the same Labour party innuendo. Of course, it just happens to be less than a week away from elections in Scotland.

Have those who work in the BBC got no self respect??

Shameful behaviour. Not fit for Scotland, and perhaps only worthy of a third world Dictatorship

I must ask the obvious question, however, are the BBC at pathetic Quay worried at the prospect of Labour losing Glasgow? It certainly seems that way.

What is it that Glasgow Labour and the BBC are so afraid of???

I did originally think that if the SNP took Glasgow, the shredders at city chambers would work overnight, but now I'm wondering if the same thing might not be also true of the BBC in Glasgow too.

The BBC and Labour in Glasgow, you can literally smell their fear.
 
 
# IamLiamto 2012-04-29 18:49
Quoting Robert Louis:
It is clear after this week, that the BBC seem to be leading the smears against Alex Salmond.

I do not know how any of the so called 'journalists' at the BBC can live with themselves.

My point is this, even if they disagree with the politics of the SNP, their role as supposedly impartial 'journalists' in a DEMOCRACY is to report facts, and NOT to 'play ball' with dirty filthy attempts by the liars of Labour to mislead and smear the SNP and the First Minister. Incidentally, how does the BBC decide what to mislead Scottish voters on regarding the SNP?? Does someone else tell them to do it??

This matter of Slamond/Murdoch has been literally done to death by the BBC, and despite them having ALL the facts, which incidentally are in the public domain, they carry on running and running with the same Labour party innuendo. Of course, it just happens to be less than a week away from elections in Scotland.

Have those who work in the BBC got no self respect??

Shameful behaviour. Not fit for Scotland, and perhaps only worthy of a third world Dictatorship

I must ask the obvious question, however, are the BBC at pathetic Quay worried at the prospect of Labour losing Glasgow? It certainly seems that way.

What is it that Glasgow Labour and the BBC are so afraid of???

I did originally think that if the SNP took Glasgow, the shredders at city chambers would work overnight, but now I'm wondering if the same thing might not be also true of the BBC in Glasgow too.

The BBC and Labour in Glasgow, you can literally smell their fear.






For decades the BBC in Scotland and the Labour party in Scotland have been hand in glove. Labour kept them sweet and the BBC reciprocated. The mangers and editors who we see in charge now of policy in Pacific Quay, are the guys who went from uni either straight in to the Labour party or the BBC. They grew up together they intermarried, they holiday in each others villas, they regard them selves as the cream of the crop who must not, nay cannot, ever be questioned. The BBC is the very glue that holds the Union together, which is why they have a very different face in Glasgow than they do in London as do Labour.

McConnels shenanigans and infidelity were spoken of and well known in BBC Newsroom circles. His bide in was treated in the same way as if she were his real wife. He was regarded as a "hell of a man." I know as I was part of the backroom tech team. There was surrounding McConnel some very heavy people who no one dared to question.

That is what we are witnessing now, the painful screeching disintegration of this circle of people born in to entitlement, patronage, and ennoblement, who know no other life. It is like watching and hearing the death of a once great ship, aground on a rockie skerry. The skills and dark arts of propaganda and lies they used so skillfully and effectively on the Scottish electorate over generations, are now being exposed for what they were. The unionists will shortly be cast in to a real world of brutal reality where no one is watching their backs and they are without protection, so they lash out in all directions as we saw in Lamonts juvenile name calling tantrums in Holyrood, Gary Robertsons on air rudeness and tantrums, McWhirters on air meltdown as Gary Robertson allowed him to fulminate and interrupt and explode with self righteous indignation. And the spectacular spluttering rage of Lord Wallace of Tankerness exposed so beatutifuily by Nicola Sturgeon, as his self righteous indignation gripped his ample thrapple. We saw a similar explosion from Wark some years ago against Alex Salmond. Her credibility never quite recovered from that.

Their gravy train is heading for the buffers, they can see it, they can feel it, they can hear it, they can even smell it, when it does it will not be pretty. They know it is coming but they cannot pull their heads out of their fundaments to look for the brakes, they do not know how, they were never trained for this one, they told us for years it would never happen, they even convivnced them selves. Well it's just round the corner, and will be on us sooner than we think.

Remeber where you were when the Berlin wall came down? It happened so fast no one could believe it.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 20:17
Quoting Robert Louis:
Have those who work in the BBC got no self respect?? Shameful behaviour. Not fit for Scotland, and perhaps only worthy of a third world Dictatorship


This sort of hysterical response is what gets cybernats a bad name. Do you think there are many third world dictatorships where government ministers are asked difficult questions by broadcasters? What is typical of dictatorships is an over-the-top response to any criticism, with condemnation of journalists who ask difficult questions.

Robust interviewing of ministers is precisely 'fit for Scotland'. What would not be fit for a free and democratic Scotland would be the condemnation of any journalist who asks difficult questions of government and refuses to be fobbed off with non-answers.

I'll be voting for independence, but if an independent Scottish government expects not to be robustly questioned by journalists then I'd rather stick with the union. At least there we have the illusion of accountability.
 
 
# roboftheburnawn 2012-04-29 21:11
Jiggsbro - so what you are saying is how a journalist questions the government will determine how you will decide to vote in the most important decision our country will ever have to make. Why don't you say what you really mean - because anyone that puts this as a deriding factor on being Independent or sticking with this current shambles is having a laugh
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 22:55
Quoting roboftheburnawn :
Jiggsbro - so what you are saying is how a journalist questions the government will determine how you will decide to vote in the most important decision our country will ever have to make.


No. I'm saying I'll be voting for independence, but if an independent Scottish government expects not to be robustly questioned by journalists then I'd rather stick with the union.

Fortunately, an independent Scottish government is likely to have a far more realistic and healthy expectation of journalists than some of the more hysterical posters on this topic.

Quoting roboftheburnawn :
Why don't you say what you really mean


I did. Why don't you read it rather than try to turn it into something else?
 
 
# roboftheburnawn 2012-04-29 23:33
Sorry Jiggsbro- you just repeated what I said again " but if an independent Scottish government expects not to be robustly questioned by journalists then I'd rather stick with the union. "
So one of your reasons in staying with the union is dependent on how " you " expect " our Government to decide how they should be questioned, - I've a list of 100 reasons how I expect our Independent Government to behave, at the bottom would be your petty regards. - Do you not have more important reasons on how you'd expect a Government to behave.

I'm sure all Politicians would rather not be subject to robust questionong of their policies, no matter what party- don't you agree, therfore you'll be voting for no one then
 
 
# Briggs 2012-04-29 21:50
You consistently miss the point that all politicians should be subject to the same rigorous cross examination whether in or out of office.

You're flogging this one and it's definitely extinct.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 22:58
I don't miss that point. I reject it. Ministers should expect more rigorous cross examination because they're in office. Their policies may be put into effect. Their actions have an effect. Opposition politicians should expect rigorous cross examination if they put forward controversial ideas, but on the whole their views are...well, just views, with no real influence. They're unimportant.
 
 
# Robert Louis 2012-04-29 22:30
Quoting Jiggsbro:
Quoting Robert Louis:
Have those who work in the BBC got no self respect?? Shameful behaviour. Not fit for Scotland, and perhaps only worthy of a third world Dictatorship


This sort of hysterical response is what gets cybernats a bad name. Do you think there are many third world dictatorships where government ministers are asked difficult questions by broadcasters? What is typical of dictatorships is an over-the-top response to any criticism, with condemnation of journalists who ask difficult questions.

Robust interviewing of ministers is precisely 'fit for Scotland'. What would not be fit for a free and democratic Scotland would be the condemnation of any journalist who asks difficult questions of government and refuses to be fobbed off with non-answers.

I'll be voting for independence, but if an independent Scottish government expects not to be robustly questioned by journalists then I'd rather stick with the union. At least there we have the illusion of accountability.





Jiggsbro,

try reading what I have written before writing your responses. Clearly above, you have discussed the same point above with others, which you have then erroneously used to address what I have written.

My point, and indeed the whole argument I have made above, was not about 'aggressive interviewing' or Governments not being held to account. The point I made, and I do think it is pretty clear on this, is that BBC Scotland from Glasgow ran more regurgitations of the Salmond/Murdoch accused line than any other broadcaster last week.

Now, the question in light of that single fact is simply this; did the BBC have information which no other journalists or broadcasters had access to? Did the BBC know something which no other broadcaster knew?? Clearly, no.

So my point is this, in a week when Labour have been shouting loud and long about how evil Mr.Murdoch is, and how truly terrible it is that the First Minister has even spoke to him, why have the BBC in Glasgow not also been asking similar questions of Labour? In London they have. Channel 4 news have. SKY news have. So why in Scotland, despite Gordon brown as Prime Minister having met with Mr Murdoch on many, many occasions, have BBC Scotland chosen to ignore the many well documented meetings they had? Why have BBC Scotland not been asking questions regarding Ed Miliband's public praise of News international or his meetings over champagne he had with Murdoch last year, I mean Ed Miliband was IN Glasgow on Friday, so it wasn't like they would have had to even travel to London.

No, you see the real issue is this, you simply cannot look at political bias by the BBC out of context. Such blatant bias has been documented here and elsewhere on many, many occasions. In that light, and considering BBC Scotland have asked no questions about the current Labour Leader's meetings with Murdoch, and have run in various forms, the same accusations against Alex Salmond more times than any other broadcaster, I think it is right to conclude that their is an 'agenda' running regarding BBC editorial policy in Scotland.

They are ipso facto a Labour party mouthpiece, exhibiting the very worst political bias.

However, getting back to your misplaced criticism. All Governments should be held to account, but importantly ALL politicians (including Labour) should be held to account. At present, the BBC ask questions of the SNP regarding Murdoch, yet on the very same topic, and where there is much greater evidence and suspicion with the current Labour leader, Ed Miliband, they ask NO questions.

It literally stretches credulity.

If this past week, the BBC in Scotland had been pursuing the Labour leader regarding Murdoch with anything near the same vigour as they have Alex Salmond and the SNP, then I would have no problem whatsoever. They didn't. It really is that freaking simple.

As regards your final paragraph, I agree all Governments need held to account, but I think all the evidence shows us, that if the post independence Government were a Labour one, then the very last media group on planet earth to hold them to account, if ever, would be BBC Scotland at pathetic quay, Glasgow.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 23:10
Quoting Robert Louis:
try reading what I have written before writing your responses.


I did. I assumed - because you made no attempt to clarify - that your comments applied to everything in the article. If, in fact, you were quite happy with the Nicola Sturgeon interview, then please ignore my comments.

The BBC in Scotland have not been pursuing the Labour leader regarding Murdoch with anything near the same vigour as they have Alex Salmond and the SNP because Labour are not in power, nor are they led by the same people who led them when they were in power.

An accusation of dodgy dealing in government is inherently more news-worthy than an accusation of dodgy dealing in a previous government over 5 years ago. Governments are held to account by media. Oppositions rarely are. That's because governments are important, oppositions much less so.

Balance does not mean asking the opposition about historical dealings that mirror current allegations about government. It means treating all governments equally. If Labour ever regain power, and if they then start courting Murdoch, and if they are not asked difficult questions about that by interviewers who interrupt them if they avoid those questions...then there are grounds for complaining about bias.

In the meanwhile, news media will go with what is news. Just as 'dog bites man' is not news but 'man bites dog' is, so 'government accused' is news but 'previous government from 6 years ago accused' is not. The key is the 'new' part of 'news'. People generally want news about now, not news about the past.
 
 
# Marga B 2012-04-30 00:08
Jiggsborough - sorry to butt in, but when you say "The BBC in Scotland have not been pursuing the Labour leader regarding Murdoch with anything near the same vigour as they have Alex Salmond and the SNP because Labour are not in power, I worry.

The Scotsman when criticised for negative reporting on the SNP government have said it is a journalist's job to "hold the government of the day to account" which seems to me to be what you are saying, forgive me if I am wrong.

I cannot agree with these views - we already have an opposition in parliament to "hold the government to account". Surely we rely on the media to hold everyone to account. The Scotsman also fiercely denies it has a political bias, when their stated purpose, to hold only the government to account, belies that neutral stance.

Now I have not listened to the interview with Sturgeon so have no idea what line it took, but we should be on our guard against media claiming neutrality while operating double standards.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-30 13:07
Unfortunately, the media cannot hold 'everyone' to account, because they have limited resources. They therefore rightly - in my view - focus on holding the most important people to account. The government are important. The opposition - particularly the current opposition - are simply not. The government pursues policies and takes actions. Actions and implemented policies are important and need to be examined. The opposition bumps its gums and does nothing. Talking and doing nothing is generally less important and generally does not need to be examined.

The government should be held to account by the opposition - although this opposition seems unable to - but also by the media and by the electorate. The job of the media is not to fawn over the government, nor even simply to report what the government does. Its job is to ask questions of government and to expose the things the government might like to hide, not least because they are normally better placed and resourced to do this than opposition parties. That role of the media is essential in a healthy democracy, and only insecure and authoritarian regimes seek to limit the ability of media to investigate government. Can you honestly say that the media should not be investigating and reporting Jeremy Hunt's dealings with Rupert Murdoch? Or is it only when they investigate the government you support that you raise objections?
 
 
# Dundonian West 2012-04-30 12:21
I have followed this whole BBC thing VERY closely,and also heard the Gary Robertson/Nicola Sturgeon interview LIVE.
Robert Louis's take on this whole BBC alleged bias is absolutely spot on.
He knows the industry----he goes into great detail,and understands the 'tricks of the trade'.
Call me gullible,but not once have I disagreed with one word he has said on this matter.
Bringing in the Paxmans and all the rest are diversions from the main question regarding BBC Scotland News/Political output.
Is it anti-SNP?
 
 
# expat67 2012-04-30 07:25
It certainly seems that way R L.
I'm sure it is difficult to be totally objective as a journalist but surely they should make an effort. Impartiality in the matter of politics as in other fields should be part of a journalists stock in trade.
It seems a long time since reporters actually reported on the affairs of state. Somewhere along the line reporters became journalists and it seems that their opinions as the ones that matter.
Now they seem to think it is their stock in trade to be judge and jury and to pass on their prejudices as the FACTS of the matter.
Hectoring, bullying, interrupting answers to their own questions when the answers don't suit their purpose, etc seems to be all that they can do.
 
 
# jafurn 2012-04-29 17:22
Disgraceful behaviour from Mr Robertson...he should be utterly ashamed of himself. If that is what passes for 'fair and unbiased' reporting then this country is in a lot of trouble.
I do however suspect that the reality is that the unionists and their supporters are the ones in a lot of trouble and they obviously know it and show it by resorting to the gutter level to which they have so blatantly descended.
Their cause is lost and they know it ...what we are seeing / hearing here is sheer desperation.
Roll on 2014
 
 
# Dowanhill 2012-04-29 17:38
Suomi - 'Nicola Sturgeon did well.I liked her suggestion that Roberstson should listen to the answer,which of course he ignored ' Totally agree with you here. The underminding of Robertson's incoherent rant was exactly the way to deal with the stupidy of the presenter. Should be adopted by the Scottish Government everytime they're being interviewed by our biased brodcaster.
 
 
# RTP 2012-04-29 17:52
I know this is O/T but has anyone else noticed that since the "Big Debate" we have not seen or heard of "Tank Lord Wallace" or for that matter Willie oppose anything the SNP suggest Bain has also been missing from the BBC airwaves is that because they the BBC are afraid,as for Robertson have never liked that man.
 
 
# Massacre1965 2012-04-29 18:17
I too have noticed that Jim Wallace has gone awol - I think his awful performance on the live debate reminded everyone what a waste of space he is
 
 
# FREEDOM1 2012-04-29 20:16
RTP I think that Cameron told the troughers to shut up and withdrew all their stupid ammendments to the Scotland bill.
 
 
# Fungus 2012-04-29 18:25
I wonder if they really can't grasp the simple point that the FM is trying to protect and create Scottish jobs and grow the Scottish economy. When your whole political existence revolves round corruption and nepotism perhaps it's difficult to see any action outwith that frame of reference.
 
 
# Robert Louis 2012-04-29 22:37
Exactly. This is the problem which Labour in Scotland have. Just because Labour behave in 'dodgy' ways, they simply find it impossible to accept that maybe, just maybe the First Minister is actually just doing his job, without looking for 'backhanders' from Murdoch or anybody else for that matter.
 
 
# rodmac 2012-04-29 18:57
Labours disgraceful smearing knows no bounds of Indecency!!

.../labour-death-wishes
 
 
# millie 2012-04-29 20:49
Great piece, well worth a read!

On the same vein, there is a very good piece from A Burdz Eye View.

‘Scottish Labour Grubbing Around in the Politics of the Gutter’

burdzeyeview.wordpress.com/.../...
 
 
# jjmac 2012-04-29 19:07
Did i read in a previous post that there is a protest arranged for 26th May.
Can someone please confirm that as i have just realised i will be in Glasgow at that time and i would love to be there to support our cause.
 
 
# scottishwatersnotforsale 2012-04-29 20:35
2pm
 
 
# naemairleesplease 2012-04-29 21:04
I think you might find out something here

www.facebook.com/.../
 
 
# daveniz 2012-04-29 19:08
o/t tories say an independent Scotland would be over reliant on oil and gas as opposed to Westminster for the past 30 years!

stv.tv/.../...

weirdly won't get direct link so just go to news click on politics and should be there!
 
 
# jafurn 2012-04-29 19:21
Quoting daveniz:
o/t tories say an independent Scotland would be over reliant on oil and gas as opposed to Westminster for the past 30 years!

stv.tv/.../...

weirdly won't get direct link so just go to news click on politics and should be there!


direct link...

news.stv.tv/.../...
 
 
# border reiver 2012-04-29 19:37
The BBC have completely lost the plot on this, along with Labour they think they have somthing to smear the First Minister, but as usual the facts are being completely ignored and they have both gone on a feeding frenzy. They are so deep into this that they have forgotten that their spitefull rantings are being played out on a world stage and it is them who are jepordising inward investment, furthermore where is Michael Moore in all this he as the Scotland Minister should be looking at the facts and putting a stop to this rubbish by the BBC, but as usual he is to busy cosying up to his Tory masters and probably encouraging this line to protect Cameron
 
 
# Bob Kingdom of Fife 2012-04-29 19:54
great distraction from reality, this is hokum , the msn are trying to manufacture a story out of nothing ,get on with the grass roots work for the May 3rd Council Elections, ' fight ' slab on the streets, by canvassing , leafletting or postering by contacting your local SNP branch , Alba Gu Brath
 
 
# Robert Louis 2012-04-29 22:41
Quoting rodmac:
Labours disgraceful smearing knows no bounds of Indecency!!

.../labour-death-wishes




The fact that this Labour supporter was actually talking about Alex Salmond's 90 year old father, and wishing him dead, simply beggars belief.

How low will Labour go??

It hasn't been covered by the BBC. No surprises there then.
Quoting Bob Kingdom of Fife:
great distraction from reality, this is hokum , the msn are trying to manufacture a story out of nothing ,get on with the grass roots work for the May 3rd Council Elections, ' fight ' slab on the streets, by canvassing , leafletting or postering by contacting your local SNP branch , Alba Gu Brath



Well said. Labour and their BBC chums can scream and shout all they want, our focus is winning elections.
 
 
# Dál Riata 2012-04-29 20:13
The English-based MSM is also, as expected, doing its damndest to turn this "Salmond Accused" non-story into some kind of political maelstrom.

Yer man at the Guardian, Severin Carrell, keeps churning out his smear articles on this one subject alone - while repeating himself every time - at a prodigeous rate - I believe it's eight(?) now!

His latest, dealing with Jack McConnell and family's phones being allegedly hacked by the News of the World quickly turns into yet another accuse-fest against Alex Salmond!

He's obviously going for the 'If-you-say-it-enough-times ...' schtick. Quite pathetic, really.

And, of course, the Guardian keeps showing its contribution to the UK's MSM charter of 'openness' and 'fairness' by not opening up Carrell's "articles" to comment BTL.

guardian.co.uk/.../...
 
 
# Jim1320 2012-04-29 20:37
Heard Carroll on Shareen this morning where he was surprisingly relaxed about the whole Murdoch thing. The view was that Lamont had failed to do much of anything at FMQ and that although the issue was perhaps a minor wobble for Salmond it was not a major political issue.

Likewise with Trump, the view was that the Trump show at the Holyrood committee hearing was theatre but ultimately a bit mad.

Of all the political coverage on the Beeb, Derek Bateman on a Saturday and Shareen on a Sunday are by far the most balanced and sane.

I have little time for the repeated question thing that Gary goes in for. All that happens is that it is bloody awful to listen to (I frequently turn the sound down) and the politician usually wastes all the time deliberately provoking the interviewer to interrupt them. In fact I think it is a technique politicians perfect to deal with the Paxman approach.
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2012-04-29 20:49
OT - Just picked this up on Twitter:

Iain McKenzie NuLabour MP for Inverclyde.

twitter.com/.../...

“ See Nat candidate standing for my ward if he wins will commute from South of England and he comes from Australia,could not make this up! “
 
 
# Jim1320 2012-04-29 21:02
Professor De Rutyer? I believe he teaches at the University of the West of Scotland but also has a Professorship in Canterbury.

Is that a bit of casual anti-foreigner stuff from Mr McKenzie?
 
 
# Fungus 2012-04-29 22:07
He can't commute from the South of England

Quote:
A local government elector for the area of the Council and are registered on the Electoral Register on the day of becoming a candidate and the day of the election or;

You have occupied or resided, as owner or a tenant, any land or premises in the Council area during the whole of the 12 months before the day you become a candidate or;

Your principal or only place of work in the twelve months preceding the day on which you are nominated as a candidate has been in the area of the authority;


In other words if you don't live or work in the council area you can't stand. MP telling porkies? Can't be.
 
 
# Wave Machine 2012-04-29 21:01
I listened to the Robertson interview and I will share my thoughts.

What the BBC do not recognise is that by constantly giving the SNP a hard time, the SNP become extremely skilled at handling the negative treatment. Nicola managed to get several hits on Labour into her replies. Nicola simply gets better, as do all SNP politicians subjected to this line of interviewing. “What does not destroy me, makes me stronger,” to quote Friedrich Nietzsche, and he was right. It is because of this reason that Labour are poor at articulating anything of quality. They don't get a hard time, so are consequently lacking in the developed skills that are exhibited by the SNP. I would imagine that the SNP are among the most skillful politicians anywhere in the world at handling interviews and in articulating their message to listeners. This is a result of the BBC techniques. So the BBC have made a rod for their own backs and for Labour and all Unionists. We should thank the BBC. We might not like listening to Robertson and his like, especially when we consider that we pay their wages, but by their inept bias they have created one of the most finely tuned political machines in Europe. So bring it on Robertson etc.
The other thing to consider is that Robertson, a male, was clearly giving Nicola, a female, a hard time, he was rude, he was bullying. He painted himself into a misogynist corner. That won't be lost on listeners.
 
 
# Dundonian West 2012-04-30 15:39
Well said Wave Machine.
 
 
# A_Scottish_Voice 2012-04-29 21:18
It looks like the unionist media are going to drag this non story out at every opportunity right up until Thursday. Why, because they don’t have anything constructive or worth while saying, so the only thing they can do is resort to unsubstantiated smears.

I even get the feeling that UK BBC news are at it. Jack McConnell, I mean come on, I haven’t seen or heard anything of him for years, and now all of a sudden he is on the UK news. What’s that all about?

As a little known Tory said recently, “something stinks here", about the whole affair.

Given that there are so many unionist outlets inflating this non event, it is imperative that the SNP can get their positive message out by all means available to them, to as many people as possible before next Thursday.
 
 
# megsmaw 2012-04-29 22:09
I can sum up labour's whole election campaign -

"Hey look at the shiny thing! Look! It's brilliant and so shiny! Look, because we have no policies what so ever. Shiny thing! eveything bad is the SNP's fault so vote for us. Hey! Shiny thing!"

but replace the "shiny thing" with smeary made up lies.
 
 
# Wave Machine 2012-04-29 21:59
Re Roll On

I live in a village called Milton, near Drumnadrochit. Don't know if you saw the recent article in the Daily Mail titled "The Reluctant Tory" about Les Mason, the pensioner, aged 87, who Ruth Davidson put up for the North, West and Central Sutherland ward at next month's council elections.
It was covered by NNS newsnetscotland.com/.../...
Les is my neighbour, lives 3 doors away.
It's easy to get hot under the collar and I was extremely tempted to have a quiet word over the garden fence with Les, but what is the point. The only thing Les is good for is having an outhouse that my dog keeps chasing the other neighbours rabbit into.
I suspect that this election will be memorable for all sorts of reasons, and the comments of Iain McKenzie just highlight the eccentricities that abound in this election.
The Les's and Iain McKenzie's of this world might get you worked up, but step back and see them for what they are; the tired last throw of a crippled and corrupt British Establishment. Iain will be looked on in later years as a sorry politician who contributed zero to either Scotland or his beloved UK, so let's laugh at his feeble attempts to generate content that he might think is relevant to the average voter.
I have more respect for Les, the old Tory along the road from me. He might be completely oblivious to the fact that his outhouse is a sanctuary for scared rabbits, but at least he's a bit honest about things. Unlike the NuLabour pawn that is Iain McKenzie.
 
 
# Massacre1965 2012-04-29 22:20
Does my old RAF pal Dave J
still bide in Milton?
 
 
# PrideoftheClyde 2012-04-29 22:31
I don't know if this is entirely off topic but does anyone have thoughts on the current 'Lord McConnell is a stand-up chap' campaign being played out on BBC Scotland at the moment?

First, we were treated to McConnell batting away any Trump allegations with a denial and then his bizzare request for charity donation like the noble lord was doing a sponsored swim. The connection we are supposed to make is clear: isn't he such a great guy doing something for charity.

Today we have been treated to the story that Lord McConnell has been the victim of phone hacking. Of course, thats how BBC Scotland have spun it. He was possibly a victim, we just don't know for sure yet. Given that we have known of the victims and potential victims for a while now, I find it curious McConnell is making such a massive song and dance about this, at this particular time, when newscorp are back at the top of the news agenda. Could he be trying to put himself on the positive side of both stories, thereby making himself immune to criticism while the BBC and SLab continue to sling mud at the FM?

God help us though if this is some attempt to re-write the history of Jack in preparation for a return to Scottish politics.
 
 
# jafurn 2012-04-29 23:07
Perhaps 'compensation' has set in?
 
 
# Robert Louis 2012-04-29 23:13
I actually am not even sure if much of the story about him taking legal advice regarding phone hacking is actually current. Did that not happen some time ago??
 
 
# PrideoftheClyde 2012-04-29 23:23
This was kind of what I was wondering. Surely all this would have happened a while ago.

Maybe I'm reading too much into it but WHY is there an effort to turn McConnell into a) a lovely guy who does stuff for charity and b) a poor soul who was a victim of those nasty Murdochs ??
 
 
# xyz 2012-04-30 02:08
They're trying desperately to find someone, anyone who will be able to successfully champion Westminster .. McConnell is just another Labour lightweight .. but then they've already tried to push forward Darling and Brown. Darling came forward to talk on TV and came across as such a blether of sh** we have not seen him since. Brown was being lionised in the Sunday Mail, but he is so badly damage, with his 'woman's a racist ' comment and all the circumstantial evidence about his unfit mental state. Then there was Billy Connelly, which is a bit absurd, people don't love him that much, that's why he never appears in Scotland, as far as I know. ... who else? ..

The BBC is doing its best, with propaganda 24/7 on behalf of the Union and therefore Westminster .. but they are also becoming damaged goods IMHO
 
 
# proudscot 2012-04-30 13:08
Quoting Robert Louis:
I actually am not even sure if much of the story about him taking legal advice regarding phone hacking is actually current. Did that not happen some time ago??


Maybe around the time he was conspiring with the then Westminster Labour Government to transfer 6000 square miles of the Scottish seabed to England? I've often wondered why that was thought to be necessary, given that the unionist propaganda tells us Scotland and England are both part of the UK, and as such are "all in it together" etc.
 
 
# MAcandroid 2012-05-01 16:05
A premeditated 'snatch' by Westminster just in case the unthinkable actually happened, and Scotland became independent one day.

"all in it together" - aye right!
Seems as if a lardship was in it for Jim Wallace but what was in it for Jack McConnell I wonder ?

Vote YES to change Scotland for GOOD.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-04-29 23:17
I find it very difficult to believe that the police have only just got round to informing Jack McConnell that he was on the list of the hacked.

The timing of both these things - the public charity appeal and the threat of legal action - is highly suspicious and look like attempts to pre-spin any historical accusations that might make the news.
 
 
# ubinworryinmasheep 2012-04-29 23:25
Labour are hoping that this sways voters into backing them this time but in my opinion since rather a lot of people read The Sun and or have Sky tv I really dont think they see Murdoch as the bogeyman. I think this hacking scandal goes as far as James Murdoch and thats it. Theres an awful lot of people in the BBC who obviously dislike Murdoch but I doubt very much that ordinary people are as outraged about it as the unionist media seem to be. Time will tell this week.
 
 
# Mad Jock McMad 2012-04-30 00:10
I have been quiet on Newsnet blogs of late, mainly becuase I can not abide the faux anger and hoakum that is so similar to the MSM we abhor.

Folk have been talking about NLP and other psychological tools being used by the Unionists as if they were some form of witchcraft that would befuddle us into voting for the status quo.

The bottom line of any psychological based system is it only works if it is based in integrity and real belief. This is fundamentally why New Labour and the rest of the Unionists approach is failing in Scotland. The bottom line is that Lamont, Scott and Davidson do not actually believe in what they are saying and in this they are being inherently dishonest. Contrary to popular belief folk quickly see through dishonesty, human's as a social group are very good at this - it is why we are the dominant animal on the globe at present. The mass of any society is willing to give people they think 'honest' a chance but once they understand they have been lied to they are unforgiving.

Ultimately 'people' do not care what the Sun, Record, Herald, Hootsmon or BBC Scotland says as once they realise they have been lied to and betrayed the end for these organisations is nigh.
 
 
# enneffess 2012-04-30 00:20
With regards to the interview with Nicola Sturgeon, the interviewer was correct in his approach.

I'm professionally trained in interviewing, and have over 16 years experience. I've also trained both interviewers and interviewees. Not just "standard" interviews, but in-depth ones where the questions can be very personal and require the interview to provide sensitive information.

I have great respect for Sturgeon, and prefer her to Salmond as the person who can take the SNP forward, whatever happens.

But as Deputy First Minister, she has to expected what may appear at times hostile questionning. It's the downside of being a senior politician.

She could have done better in the interview, but you cannot demand that interviews should be nice and relaxed. Voters who hijack politicians in the street or ask questions on the radio can floor even the strongest. Thatcher got bombed in a radio interview once, and there was a Tory minister who walked out of an interview.

I suspect part of the problem is that justifying the relationship with Murdoch is difficult.

Most voters probably don't care that much, but with the news that McConnell and his children have had their phones hacked, the issue has suddenly got a lot closer to home.

If McConnell's phones have been hacked, then who else in Scottish politics has as well?

What if a senior SNP figure suddenly finds that their phone number is also on that list?

If that happens, then the situation will get a lot more serious for Salmond. Could it be that Sturgeon knows something not yet in the public eye?

And I should point out that I think the timing of the news about McConnell is just a little bit too convenient.
 
 
# PrideoftheClyde 2012-04-30 01:09
Jack McConnell's phone maybe being hacked is something which probably won't resonate with the general public all that much. Or if it emerges that any other politician has had their phone hacked. Now, if Susan Boyle, Neil Lennon or any other celebrity started drawing attention to being a phone hacking victim then this story will be given a few more days of life, at the very least (btw not saying SB or NL were victims, just using them as examples of the sort of people Joe Public would give attention to).

The McConnell stories croping up seem to serve the purpose of protecting the Labour party and deflect attention from the undeniable fact that Labour invested massive amounts of time and effort courting the Murdochs and their papers.

Still, I'm looking forward to the next McConnell story as the Labour party seem intent on giving him God-like status. I mean, we all remember when McConnell was FM don't we? It was always lovely and warm and whisky flowed in Scotland's streams, children were always singing and laughing... you get the picture. Of course, all this will be covered by the BBC. I think they are currently working on a feature: 'Jack McConnell, 50 reasons why he is the best First Minister Scotland has ever had'.
 
 
# Blanco 2012-04-30 07:33
NFS, i would not be at all surprised if senior SNP politicians had had their telephone conversations listened in to at some point in the past. Not necessarily by News Corp though.
 
 
# gus1940 2012-04-30 09:34
Not just SNP politicians.

Does anybody believe that the sinister forces of 'security' in London don't have a record of all those pro-independence commentators a.k.a Cybernats on this and all the other on-line forums.
 
 
# X_Sticks 2012-04-30 10:27
Blanco,

I would not be at all surprised if senior SNP politicians had had every telephone conversation listened in to.
 
 
# proudscot 2012-04-30 13:18
Quoting Blanco:
NFS, i would not be at all surprised if senior SNP politicians had had their telephone conversations listened in to at some point in the past. Not necessarily by News Corp though.


You mean MI5/Special Branch will have a record of several hundred calls from Bute House to the First Minister's favourite curry outlet?
 
 
# youoffmyplanet 2012-04-30 01:07
Like many of you I have been incredulous that for a solid week Reporting Scotland has managed to fit 3 or 4 anti-government news pieces into a single 30 minute daily news roundup.

However, the thing that has worried me most in the last week has been the reaction of SNP supporters. Far too many have brushed it off and said 'the Scottish public will never fall for such rubbish from the ENGLISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION'.........now come now, you can't know that, no one can. There are very many people out there, me included, who take the BBC with a pinch of salt but enjoy and trust some of its stuff. People who have just got home from work and watch those news reports instead of reading blogs or decent newspapers may just revert back to Labour on 3rd May in order to please their granny.

We can be assured of gains across Scotland in a few days time, it is not presumptuous to say that. But it is presumptuous and near-delusional to say that this negative PR is ineffectual in the very fickle battleground of Glasgow at such a crucial time.

I believe the average voter in Scotland is more informed than the average in the rest of the UK, but it is fairly irrelevant and unknown to them that SLab and BBCScot are so cosy. It is our job to make them aware of that between now and 2014 through casual conversation. People will run a million miles if you start calling it the EBC etc, whether it is or not, it makes you sound like a rabid conspiracy theorist and is a major turn-off.
 
 
# PrideoftheClyde 2012-04-30 01:29
I would disagree that the average Scottish voter is more informed than others in the rUK. Most people in Scotland are probably just as informed as anyone else. You make a good point though that people don't notice the cosy BBC/Lab connection. In fact, I had to collect my jaw from the floor at work the other day when I had to explain to a very intelligent and 'tuned-in' colleague that newspapers were partial and promoted a political view. I have sleepless nights now wondering how far this goes in society.

It is about time we stopped the ECB jibes and so on. There are ways of demonstrating bias in the news but we have to think outside the box. Someone on here suggested a demonstration at Pacific Quay. I don't think I am alone in thinking that this would be the single-most stupid mistake that anyone could make when trying to battle BBC bias. Not enough has been made about the inability to comment on Scottish BBC blogs. A campaign (non-partisan) to end this inexcuseable censorship would be far more effective than appearing like a bunch of crazies (and this is how the BBC would run it) outside BBC Scotland HQ with placards.
 
 
# tartanpigsy 2012-04-30 02:02
POTC Do you seriously believe the BBC will run anything about the Demo at PQ ??

The last thing they want is to attract any attention to those questioning their hallowed "impartiality"

There is going to be a demo at Pacific Quay on Saturday the 26th May and about time too, there are many elements that can be incorporated into a demo so that it becomes a damn site more than people standing waving placards, I would urge you to get on side with this demo, we want to incorporate radio/TV and web clips highlighting what is going on, and how its being done, the closing of the blogs, the omission and burying of news, the correlation between BBC Scotland stories and Lamonts laments on a Thursday lunchtime,

I agree with you about the difficulty of getting the message out to people about how subtle manipulation pervades the BBC Scotland current affairs output, and that jibes like calling it the EBC aren't going to convince anyone, butI am of the opinion that we arent going to gently persuade the BBC to change or moderate its behaviour, we are going to have to use every means possible, and having a demonstration with as much of the press worldwide who show any interest contacted in advance has to be one of our tactics
 
 
# PrideoftheClyde 2012-04-30 02:48
Whether or not the BBC will run anything about a demo at their HQ will pretty much depend on the demo.

But be warned there is no news outlet in Scotland that will cover your demo favourably or with any kind of balance. Not even STV by the way, for very good reasons. It is a matter of complete irrelevance to the bulk of Scots if some Spanish network covers the demo in a favourable way. News organisations have no interest in highlighting bias in the media even if it is bias in at a rival network.

I really hope I am wrong. Although I won't be on your demo, I wish you luck. Be cautious though and try your best to take so many people to Pacific Quay that day. Like hundreds if not a good thousand. BBC Scotland has been a mouthpiece for SLab for a long time now and it is time for it to be exposed.
 
 
# Diabloandco 2012-04-30 15:57
You missed RT today then - good coverage of the Biased Broadcaster and a good wee bit about our FM too!
 
 
# mealer 2012-04-30 08:15
Actually,I think Gary Robertsons verbal assault on Nicola Sturgeon does much to expose the BBCs bias to the average punter.I try to spread the word,through casual conversation,th at the BBC is biased.I'm pretty sure I can detect a growing acceptance among ordinary folk that the BBC is anti-SNP and anti independence.But much still to be done over the next 2 years.Softly,softly.Sow a few seeds of doubt about the BBC in peoples minds and they will listen to their broadcasts with a more critical ear.And it will become obvious to them that the BBC cant be trusted.
 
 
# gus1940 2012-04-30 09:36
Call Kay with Eck. It is now about 40 minutes in to the call-in with Eck and so far there has not been a single caller supporting him or the SNP Government.

What else should we have expected from The BBC?
 
 
# gus1940 2012-04-30 09:52
Well that's the call-in with Eck over and at last the final caller professed to have voted SNP last time and intended to vote SNP on thursday.

However, after stating that in his intro his call consisted totally of critism of The SNP's opposition to the Glasgow Airport Rail LInk.

So that's it then the whole call-in consisted of attacks on The SNP.

Our wonderful unbiased BBC at its best.
 
 
# Marga B 2012-04-30 10:04
This treatment of Salmond is what the Scottish media justify as "holding the government to account". This for them puts them on a moral high ground to bat off their critics.

Effectively the media by claiming to have this duty (one Scotsman reporter at least has literally made this claim) are saying that they have a moral duty to act as opposition to government.

I thought that newspapers were there to call everyone to account. The opposition in parliament is there to call the government to account.

I am surprised that so many people seem to accept this moral sophistry which the Scottish media use to justify biased reporting.
 
 
# zeldomzeen 2012-04-30 11:09
Anyone remotely interested in the shenanigans of politicians can see what Labour are up to: smear the FM and help prevent the local elections being too grim a result-particularly in Glasgow.
Thing is they've overplayed it and got hysterical. Hopefully the electorate are savvy to that and will resent Labours crude and patronising attempt at manipulation.
 
 
# eibbar snrub 2012-04-30 11:16
I listened to the interview and I have read the comments. In my view the interview was no worse than is to be expected when a senior member of a Government, Holyrood or Westminster, is being interviewed. What I cannot stand, and it applies to all interviewers today, is the constant interruption of answers because the interviewer doesn't like the answer he is receiving. He is asking the questions so he should allow them to be answered before jumping in, or phrase his questions more carefully to prevent prevarication by the interviewee.
Finally what I also didn't like was the naffness and stupidity of the irrelevent questions being asked; as if anyone can give an answer to other peoples' perceptions of an issue. Anyway Nicola finally owned him by telling him to more or less shut up and let her answer.
 
 
# snowthistle 2012-04-30 11:32
Regarding the constant interruptions, I think Isabel Fraser, though she has her faults, is the only one who doesn't doe this. She gets far more out of the people she interviews and is more effective by letting people speak.
 
 
# proudscot 2012-04-30 13:44
gus 1940, I too listened to Call Kay(e) with Alex Salmond this morning. Most of the people phoning in did raise matters of concern to them regarding their local areas, which is what the programme was about - i.e. the local elections.

However Kay(e) herself did manage to slip in one barbed reference to the Murdoch "relationship" faux controversy, and was quite dismissive of the FM's response. She then got quite shrill in her attempts to join another caller to talk over the FM on the subject of wind farms.

Finally, there was the self-claimed "SNP voting" caller who went on at great length about the Glasgow Airport Rail Link - shelved at the time as expensive, uneconomic and unnecessary, as there is a perfectly good airport bus service running from Buchanan Bus Station at 10 minute intervals, same as exists from the Bridges to Edinburgh Airport.

At the finish of the programme, given Kay(e)'s constant wittering and interrupting of both the FM and callers, my final thought was "If only Graham Stewart had been hosting the programme like the last couple of weeks..."
 

You must be logged-in in order to post a comment.

Banner
Banner

Donate to Newsnet Scotland

Latest Comments