Sunday, November 27, 2022

The BBC's "respect" deficit

When TV news journalists on both sides of the Atlantic report on comments from Donald Trump or one of his allies about how the 2020 presidential election was rigged or stolen, it's become standard for them to add: "But these claims are false and baseless.  The 2020 election was not rigged and Joe Biden won it fair and square.  Mr Trump has provided no evidence to dispute this." They do that on the basis, as the adage goes, that it's not the job of journalists to provide balance between one person who says it's raining and another person who says it's dry - their job is instead to stick their heads out of the window, discover the truth, and report it.  

That can't be a selective principle, though - it can't only apply to the comfort zone of Donald Trump as an international bogeyman. It has to apply fearlessly to every other politician, regardless of political persuasion or status, who says things that objectively simply do not stand up.  Which brings me to the formulation that the BBC have used for an extremely long time, and used again on the day of the Supreme Court ruling, about the positions of different parties on the holding of an independence referendum: "The SNP say that the result of the 2021 Scottish Parliament election gives them a mandate to hold a second referendum in October 2023, while the Conservatives say that the result of the 2014 referendum should be respected."  These two positions are presented as direct opposites - which implicitly endorses the Tory nonsense that if you want a second referendum, you're not respecting the result of the first.

What the BBC should be saying, of course, is: "The Conservatives say that the result of the 2014 result should be 'respected'.  However, the result of that referendum has indeed been respected by all sides, and the SNP have made clear that they will continue to respect it.  There is no suggestion from any significant part of the Yes movement that independence can be declared without a fresh referendum or equivalent democratic event.  The Conservatives have provided no evidence to dispute this."

So how about it, BBC?  Or do you see your role as to provide balance between truth and lies?

*  *  *

If you'd like to help Scot Goes Pop continue, donations are welcome HERE.


  1. You know, PeeJay, one day I should publish a collated version of the hundreds of abusive, homophobic, misogynistic and racist comments you've attempted to post here over the last couple of years. At least 20% of them have called for named politicians or public figures to be executed. You're not exactly the greatest advert for the Wings Fan Club, whatever you may think. You should actually be grateful to me, because by not publishing them I may have saved you from being arrested.

    1. The SNP have never respected the result of the indyref. I wonder how much investment in Scotland has been lost owing to the uncertainty caused by the continual campaigning.

    2. That's an utterly nonsensical statement. The SNP and other pro-independence parties have scrupulously respected the 2014 result - in full and without reservation. They've always made clear that independence cannot happen without a fresh referendum or equivalent democratic event.

      If you want to claim otherwise, you'll have to tell us on what date the SNP defied the referendum result by declaring independence.

      Good luck.

    3. Anonymous - you speculate about a possible loss. On the other hand there is the billions stolen from Scotland - possibly as much as a trillion- by our colonial masters England. That is reality your concern is possibility. I can also speculate that without independence billions more will be stolen over the next fifty years.
      England has been looting across the world but it is now limited to its near neighbour's.

  2. This from the Bathtub Admiral also known as yesindyref2 about the SNP.

    " From a party of protest, to the party of opposition, to the party of government - to a party of procrastination, indecision and seat warming. The rise and fall of the party of hope for Independence minded People of Scotland. "

    It looks like the penny has dropped and the Admiral is looking like he can no longer be accurately classified as a WGD numpty. It can't be long before the big dug bans him from WGD. The Admiral's words reflect how I felt in Jan 2020 after hearing Sturgeons surrender speech. She told us she would not be holding an illegal referendum and then went out and ensured that it would be deemed illegal all at the same time saying she would hold a referendum. The deceit is monstrous but numpties cannae see it staring them in the face.

  3. I 100% agree with the contents of this article.

  4. You really have to laugh at the WGD numpties. They didn't watch Keith Brown on TV but they are sure about what he said. They don't know who Mhairi Hunter and Toni Giuliano are so they will ignore what they said. We believe what Nicola says - it's all the BBC making stuff up says the WGD numpties. You numpties believed Sturgeon for 7 years when she said there would be a referendum. It really is a faith based cult on WGD and the big dug has tapped in to it to feather his nest.

  5. An excellent article by the big dug on WGD. He is finally coming round to accepting there is no democracy for Scotland in the UK. Something some of us have been saying for some time and got called a Unionist by people like that arsehole Skier. So as the big dug says and I have always said stop calling them unionists. They are English/British nationalists or prison guards or colonial masters or House Jocks or Vichy Scots. Take your pick.
    Legally at the Treaty of Union in 1707 there was and still is a union but in every practical sense that ship sailed hundreds of years ago.

    England rules - that's it. Our political leaders continually sell us out.

    Scots want their country back. Britnats bow to their masters in London and Sturgeon does a super duper line in bowing.

  6. WGD numpties are good at waiting. WGD numpties are happy to wait 2 years to the promised de facto referendum. If Sturgeon had said 5 years then that would be fine as well with them. The WGD numpties are really really good at waiting. They will just keep on waiting.

    WGD numpties are also very good at forgetting. They forget all Sturgeons broken promises. They forget she thinks the BBC is a key and valued institution. They forget the SNP fanzine The National told them Indyref2 was just around the corner more than 50 times. They forget that a snap UK GE would mean very little time for campaigning. They forget the SNP pocketed >£600k for Indyref2. They forget Murray Foote is beavering away in the SNP pocketing SNP funds. They have even now forgotten it was Sturgeon and her Britnat Lord Advocate who got indyref2 declared illegal. WGD numpties are world champions at forgetting. They forget a lot.