Monday, March 19, 2018

Senior BBC journalists are completely losing the plot in their posture towards Alex Salmond

If you haven't seen/heard Alex Salmond's exchange with the BBC's John Sweeney yesterday, it's worth following this link and having a listen, because it's one of the most extraordinary things I've ever heard.  What Sweeney's almost comically hostile attitude reminded me of was the guidelines for BBC presenters in the 1980s and early 90s when dealing with Sinn Féin spokespeople.  Although interviews with Sinn Féin were permitted, they weren't to be regarded as anything remotely like normal interviews with normal politicians, where at least part of the purpose is to allow the interviewee to get his or her point across.  Instead, presenters were expected to do anything and everything necessary to destroy the credibility of the interviewee, and to constantly remind viewers that Sinn Féin were not a legitimate political party with a legitimate viewpoint, but rather a public relations front for filthy terrorists and murderers.

Incredible though it may seem, that was almost exactly the posture Sweeney adopted towards Salmond yesterday.  He literally treated Salmond, a former First Minister of Scotland and a current Privy Counsellor, as the equivalent of a terrorist spokesperson.  Sweeney was theoretically in the position of interviewee, but from the moment he opened his mouth, his single-minded objective was to deny the legitimacy of Salmond as an interviewer on the basis that Salmond is a paid Putin stooge, to deny the legitimacy of any questions Salmond asked on the basis that they were coming out of the mouth of a paid Putin stooge, and even to deny the legitimacy of the subject that he had been invited on the programme to speak about because it had been selected by a paid Putin stooge.  It was clear that he had decided in advance that he would regard his participation in the interview as a failure unless he effectively pulled off a full-blown coup against the interviewer and managed to spend the whole ten minutes putting Salmond on the ropes about a completely different subject, ie. Salmond supposedly being a paid Putin stooge.

At several points, Sweeney attempted to contrast the different practices of the BBC and Russian-owned RT, on which Salmond's weekly TV show runs.  But let me just ask the obvious question: can anyone imagine a BBC interviewer putting up with the behaviour that Sweeney exhibited yesterday?  Off the top of my head, I cannot recall a single example of a guest on the BBC being allowed to spend an entire interview ignoring the actual subject of the interview and instead making a prolonged personal attack on the interviewer.  The closest I can think of is Jo Swinson asking an awkward question about John Humphrys' views on his female colleagues, but that was much briefer and much more courteous, and she only got away with it because of truly exceptional circumstances.  Normally the outside interests of the interviewer are completely off limits.  Sweeney also suggested that RT does not allow criticism, whereas people are permitted to criticise the BBC on the BBC, but is it actually true that there's any real distinction there?  I've seen limited criticisms of RT expressed on RT, and yes, I've also seen limited criticisms of the BBC expressed on the BBC.  In both cases, the broadcaster itself is the gatekeeper of the extent and type of criticism that is aired, by virtue of being able to select which people are or are not invited to speak.  Former BBC Scotland presenter Derek Bateman has often noted that he hasn't been invited to take part in any BBC programmes as a pundit or commentator since he started making constructive criticisms of the corporation on his blog.  Paul Kavanagh, a fierce critic of the BBC, has similarly observed that he is never invited onto BBC programmes, in spite of the fact that as a regular columnist on The National he is on a list of people recommended to the BBC on an ongoing basis as possible pro-independence guests.  By contrast, a small number of 'safer' pro-independence guests such as Angela Haggerty (broadly a defender of the BBC) appear extremely frequently.

What Sweeney did yesterday was eerily reminiscent of Nick Robinson's outburst against Salmond on social media a few months ago, which leaves us with the distinct impression of a BBC that now views itself as being in a state of open warfare with the former leader of the UK's third largest political party, and doesn't see any problem with that.  I have to say I'm struggling to imagine the BBC losing the plot quite so comprehensively with the former leader of any of the main London-based parties, which raises some troubling questions about underlying attitudes within the BBC towards the Scottish independence movement.  Is the ludicrously contrived link between Salmond and the Russian menace being used as a conveniently deniable outlet for the contempt some senior BBC journalists and presenters have always felt towards the SNP in general?  If so, how can the BBC be trusted to cover Scottish politics and the independence issue impartially?

Incidentally, what yesterday's interview was actually supposed to be about was Newsnight's bizarre decision to use a backdrop featuring a doctored image of Jeremy Corbyn in front of the Kremlin as part of a Bolshevik-style poster.  Salmond did a heroic job of dragging Sweeney kicking and screaming back to that topic, which produced this remarkable moment about three minutes in -

Alex Salmond: The mainstream press are accusing Jeremy Corbyn of being a Kremlin stooge.  So why should you picture him against the Kremlin?

John Sweeney: Because somebody has poisoned two British citizens, or rather one British citizen and his daughter, and you cannot buy this nerve agent in a shop.

What?  I mean, what?!  How does that reply make any logical sense unless the BBC are insinuating that Corbyn was somehow involved in the poisoning himself?  I asked that question on Twitter last night, and Sweeney (who must have been searching for his own name, because I didn't tag him in the tweet) offered this retort -

"James! The exchange was more nuanced than that. I pointed out @AlexSalmond takes money from the Kremlin’s chums and that too many Putin critics get shot. After a bit he cut me off."

Words fail me.  If anyone can detect even an ounce of "nuance" in Sweeney's unhinged, paranoid rant about a veteran Scottish politician supposedly being a puppet of the Russian state, you're doing better than me.

63 comments:

  1. If that's a 'senior BBC journalist' it explains why no one trusts Auntie any more.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, yes, it was an astonishing 10 minutes, which I hope everyone takes the time to listen to. Sweeney will have been congratulated by his colleagues for trying to completely disrupt the interview and for screeching 4 or 5 times "It wasn't Photoshopped". Presumably they used GIMP or COREL?

    Whatever he hoped to gain, the interview said far more about the BBC than about RT or Alex Salmond. Losing it "big time" as the saying goes.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I listened to this interview from an English Corbyn supporter's viewpoint and felt Salmond achieved what he set out to do. For someone who's only recently become involved in broadcasting, I thought Salmond was well in charge of the interview with the BBC chap. Salmond was calm and direct, while man-on-the-ropes Sweeney came across as an aimlessly arrogant stuttering pub-orator.
    Ho, Sweeney, it's your round.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Salmond has been involved in broadcasting as an interviewee for several decades so I think he knows all the tricks. Any SNP interviewee knows he or she will be harangued, interrupted and talked over from start to finish. It's standard operating procedure for the BBC when interviewing SNP politicians.

      Delete
  4. Salmond may be taking his little turn on the catwalk as an acceptable face for RT, like the venerable American talk show host, Larry King in the US. But, Boris Johnson and his fellow Tories, they are just Putin's whores. Taking cash for services rendered.

    Sorry to put it so bluntly. Boris, British Foreign Secretary, bought and sold for Russian gold.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Kangaroo says

    James your critique is so accurate.

    I watched that LBC interview (AS in studio) and was simply astonished that Sweeney was behaving so badly, continually suggesting that "Corbyn hadn't been photoshopped". It was blatant BBC propaganda to portray Corbyn in front of the Kremlin regardless of whether or not photoshop was involved. Newsnight is a BBC flagship programme. If anybody needed convincing that the BBC is a propaganda channel this interview is confirmation, we need to keep this as it is pure gold.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Jeremy would look better wearing a black beret in the presence of Jerry Adams...However the present interviewing tactics by the media are appalling... There was a time when a person was allowed to answer a question...I listened to a TV debate from 1975 on the EEC issue and all present were able to speak without interupption... We now have TV personalities in disguise as newsreaders.

    ReplyDelete
  7. THe British establishment are never going to forgive Salmond in particular, but also the SNP, and now the wider independence movement for challenging their power and status. The BBC are doing the same thing with Corbyn now. The British establishment is essentially right wing and pro-war, pro large, multinational corporations, pro-nuclear weapons, against social democracy and socialism. It is no surprise they are still treating Salmond like this, nor how they are covering Corbyn in general.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why then are the Nat sis supporting the UK Gov over the alleged Nerve Agent attack?

      Delete
    2. State of this.

      Delete
    3. FM statement: "I fully support the UK guv going on what I've been told"

      Delete
  8. Try texting to phone-ins on radio Scotland and accusing them of bias. You soon get banned!

    I texted 100s of times and got a fair number read out. Until, that is, I complained about their coverage of the SNP. Suddenly no texts get read. B.Bias.Corp.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All that texting, you must be lonely and unemployed.

      Delete
    2. State of this.

      Delete
  9. The BBC log agonist my trust as an impartial broadcaster. The first B should stand for Biased. This was clearly in evidence I the run up to the Scottish Independence referendum.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @ GWC2, that is a stupidly tiresome question to post.

    As regards the BBC, if you are pro-independence, or indeed pro-democracy, then recognise the BBC as your enemy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry it made you tired however it is a legitimate question as the Nat sis support the Tories on this issue. And when you consider there is no evidence yet it did come as a surprise.

      Delete
    2. State of this.

      Delete
    3. Is this your way of avoidance? You are an excuse for a prick.

      Delete
    4. State of this.

      Delete
    5. FM statement: "I fully support the UK guv going on what I've been told"

      Delete
  11. Amazing to see the revolting racist and all round defender of BBC Paedophilia @johnsweenyroars is still punting his Alexie Salmondski is in the pay or Putin and the bbbbbc is't a state propaganda machine.

    Sneaky little smear over Donald Trump too. It's a full house of Yoon smear bingo.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Sweeney appeared to pull BBC down to the level of RT and other Russian propaganda outlets.

    That said, I think it is tragic that Alex Salmond, an excellent FM, gives this kind of journalistic mud slinging the dignity. I had always seen him as an unspent political force. I‘m not so sure now.

    ReplyDelete
  13. What does GWC actually stand for?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only its own ultra-right-wing, green ink letters to the Dreary Heil level of hatred...

      Delete
    2. Gentlemen's Water Closet.

      Delete
    3. Gibbering Westminster clown

      Delete
  14. Normally to piss unlike you Jock nat si nancy bhoys who sit down.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Alex should've kept going. I think John was just a couple of slapdowns away from another Scientology-type meltdown.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Because they've failed to grasp the big stories of Indy and Brexit and Ireland, they are now feeling fragile and vulnerable, and now doing the petualnt lashing out bit.

    ReplyDelete
  17. One of the main functions of any state broadcaster is to protect the interests of their state.
    Scottish independence and those who support it represent a threat to the British state so it should not be a surprise that people like AS are treated in a hostile manner.
    This is especially the case with AS who is presenting a political show hosted by a foreign state broadcaster viewed with hostility by the London establishment.
    We now see why broadcasting is "reserved" to London.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eck is not doing any wrong as it is a legitimate job. He was for British unilateral disarmament. I do not recall him ever condemning the Soviets.

      Delete
  18. Haven't bothered watching the clip as I know well by now what to expect from britnat broadcasters (which is why I no longer watch any news/politics/current affairs progs on msm or pay the propaganda tax) but is this Sweeney specimen the very same who so comically lost his rag when scientologists wound him up? That was feckin hilarious.

    Anyway James the only thing that I find surprising about the whole thing is that you seem to be somewhat surprised/taken aback by it. What else would you expect from the british brainwashing corporation?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hahaha Thanks for the link James. Good for Alex to put that simpering, slithering Sweeney on the spot. Must have felt good after the great many times he's been treated unfairly by the EBC.

    I shall continue to watch and enjoy RT as long as I get news from far and wide. As state sponsored tv goes it's pretty damn good. And no paedophiles in it's history!

    What will we call our broadcaster when indy? Should we have a competition? Exciting thought...

    ReplyDelete
  20. It reminded me, horrbly, of that terrible Andrew Marr interview with Nicola Sturgeon when the same hostile, bullying, disgraceful behaviour came through from the BBC. I used to admire the BBC, I thought they employed balanced decent individuals to do a worthwhile honest job. Alex Salmond did an excellent job and showed the BBC up for what it is. Biased indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Alan Whicker once said that the secret of a good interview is to let the interviewee make their point(s) without interruption and trust the audience to decide.

    Nothing has changed except sometimes its hard to trust the audience.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I as well as others watched the heated exchange when the mask was removed from a BBC employee the obvious vitriol was evident from the outset , it started so well Alex jokingly asking ok what have you been up to this time , Then woosh he is attacked by a rabid dog with i will show you attitude , and from an employee of MI5 oops the BBC Freudian slip there .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Besides the money Kim Jung Eck has to go declare his loyalty. Is it with the UK or the Russian mafia.

      Delete
    2. State of this.

      Delete
    3. Bertie Armstrong will have to put it to his lodge meeting before he's told what to do, then consult Ruth Davidson on what her instructions from head office lodge are

      Delete
  23. Another famous journalist Ruth Davidson has just won a charity Great British Bake Off.
    Declined to tackle the fish pie though (reserved to London)? or Brussels?
    Back to the day job then.
    Must be something important happening.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe she is concerned about the Common Fish Pie that the EU has plundered and the Scottish Nst sis want to continue happening.

      The Scottish Nat si EU crawlers who want to sell out Scotland that is.

      Delete
    2. State of this.

      Delete
  24. There will be no hard border with Northern Ireland because Northern Ireland is part of the UK.
    There may be a hard border between the UK and ROI and that is a problem for ROI not the UK.?.


    If ROI and their Jock nat si bum bhoy pals want a hard border and crawl to the EU then go on go on. Your loss fascists.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. State of this.

      Delete
    2. In fairness to Davidson with her ettle of becoming an MP, its clever of her to 'keep the heid doon' at this time and maybe let others comment on the sell-out of the Scots fishermen.
      Poor leadership that won't go down well in the fishing communities.

      Delete
    3. What is the Nat si policy on the fishing industry? There is no sell out by the UK Government as their policy will be implemented later than expected.
      The nat sis do not want to be in control of Scottish fisheries and agriculture.
      They want so called independence and hand powers back to the EU.
      Most jock Blue Tories are remoaners like their Tartan Tory bum chums.

      Delete
    4. "There is no sell out by the UK Government as their policy will be implemented later than expected."

      Who said satire is dead?

      Delete
    5. Aye James you left the bit out about nat si fisheries policy! Surprise surprise.

      Delete
    6. State of this.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous, I am sure young James is capable of answering. So James what you say?

      Delete
    8. Young James why can you not just say that the Jock nat si party want to stay in the EU and the common fisheries policy and do not give a shit for Scottish or British fishermen and their communities. Go on be honest.

      Delete
    9. State of this.

      Delete
  25. The BBC stopped doing journalism an age ago. Puerile, untrustworthy, dumbed-down rubbish which I do not waste my time with any more. Never heard of Sweeney but if the above exchange is typical then he is looking for the market that exists below the gutter.

    That doesn't mean that RT or Fox or Sky do not have their warts too but after Dr Kelly, Savile and the rest, the BBC have no high moral ground to stand on. Instead, the BBC major only bombast and pomposity...fig leaves that cover very little.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Jock nat sis on the run an feart tae comment on the Scottish fisheries community.
    Pure wee plonkers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. State of this.

      Delete
    2. The jock Nat sis in the Commons were pure piss pathetic yesterday. Taken tae the cleaners they were. State of them.

      Delete
    3. State of this.

      Delete
  27. A few weeks ago I attended a media conference which included a large proportion of very senior BBC types. They were individually self-convinced of their own fairness and impartiality. In a group, the mutual admiration was enormous and impermeable to any criticism. So now my collective noun for a group of BBC types is "a smugness" .

    The merest mention of Russia Today was enough to send them into paroxysms of fury.
    The conference was before the Salisbury poisonings but they definitely wanted it shut down.

    Incidentally Mrs May has been signing up to EU defence integration since she came to power. Officials were told they could do it as we would not be affected because we are leaving - but it's all in the draft agreement . Retired senior officers are most concerned.
    The allegedly Russian poisoning has come at an optimum time to get the whole thing pushed through as defence against Vlad the Bad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vlad the bad has invaded territories that are not Russian. I do agree with him helping Assad deafeat the religious looney tunes in Syria.
      The Scottish Nat sis are backing Mrs May over the alleged nerve agent attack.
      The UK has recently agreed a defence pact with Poland. The EU is defended by NATO so there is no need for a seperate EU military force.
      The Scottish Nat sis have never been friends of NATO.

      Delete
    2. State of this.

      Delete