This is my third video of the morning - this time a short one (i.e. under one minute).
You can view this here.
The transcript is:
The BBC put out a webpage this week highlighting the profiles of each of the major party leaders in the UK, and they missed out John Swinney from the SNP.
They included the Tories, Labour, Liberal Democrats, Plaid Cymru, the Greens, and so on. But the SNP were not there, even though they were the third largest party in Parliament before it was dissolved in the run up to this election.
Now, that's absurd.
What is wrong with the BBC and its relationship with Scotland? It seems that deep in its DNA, it can't talk about a party that wants to make Scotland independent.
That's not a British Broadcasting Corporation as a result.
It's an English Broadcasting Corporation.
Something has to change in the BBC or it's failing the whole country and not just Scotland.
And by the way - if you wonder why I do these short videos, this one had already been viewed well over 1,000 times on TikTok by 8 am this morning. That's why.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
The Ingerlish establishment in action. Is all. There will be apologies (usually with fingers crossed). As I have repeatedly said: the function of main stream media is grooming of the English population. This action falls into the class of “othering”. The Scots will (& have been) variouly portrayed as whining, ungrateful, useless, a drain on finances, spendthrift, not even a real nation etc. This is useful for the future, in the event of UDI, (illegal in English eyes) various rationales would have been constructed for direct English action – particualrly if it was a distraction from problems in England.
Mike, the portrayal of Scots as “whining, ungrateful, useless, a drain on finances, spendthrift, not even a real nation etc” is standard fare in UK MSM, so much so that I now classify it as “foreign news” and largely ignore it. However, the Covid Enquiry has recently thrown up unexpected evidence of UK Gov’t making the denigration of Scotland and the Scots official policy.
The Conclusion to Gove’s Cabinet paper of 21 July 2020 about the Covid threat confirms what we’ve experienced throughout the last three years (and earlier): an endless MSM & political undermining of everything about Scotland from sports to economy, to politics, to governmental competence, to our laws and legal system, to education, to health, to languages, to culture, to our very identity. Gove’s paper is classified as ‘Official – Sensitive’ so isn’t available online, but bits of it have escaped into the web via reporting of the Covid Enquiries. The only bit I’ve seen so far is Para 17 – Gove’s Conclusions – which states “Absent COVID-19, I am firmly of the view that the risk to the Union would be the greatest challenge this Government needed to control and unfortunately it is no way lessened by the parallel demands of the epidemic and our economic recovery. In the lead up to May next year, and throughout this Parliament, protecting and strengthening the Union must be a cornerstone of all that we do. The paper therefore asks Cabinet to agree the need to act, to endorse the strategic approach described in paragraph six and to take forward the specific actions detailed above and summarised at Annex A”.
I haven’t been able to see para 6 or Annex A as yet, but in the intervening 3 years the UK Gov has conducted a clear and concerted effort to denigrate every aspect of life in Scotland. Early in the pandemic, UK Gov provided support to the MSM to ensure continuing output and I’m pretty sure Gov financial support came with a quid pro quo about “acceptable” content. What we saw in Scotland was a distinct change in press reporting, with papers like the Herald, which had hitherto maintained some balance between pro-Independence and pro-Union content, making a marked shift towards the Union. Even their pro-Indy writers suddenly changed their tone towards the Union and the National toned down its pro-Indy stance somewhat. BBC Scotland’s output became more pro-Union to the extent of presenting fact-free assertions and outright lies and distortions, while, at the same time BBC’s London HQ output and senior staffing and became more pro-Conservative in its view.
As time goes by, more and more evidence appears of UK Gov policies to undermine the governance of Scotland and to prevent Scotland’s people from having any say in our country’s future, while simultaneously our country’s assets are being stripped out without recompense. What I find surprising is that we haven’t seen the people on the streets – yet.
I have been told by people in East Anglia, who seemed to be speaking in all seriousness, that Scots should be grateful to be allowed to vote given how much they cost the English. You can imagine my reaction…
People in the streets? well quite. How to galvanise a nation? – against the propaganda effort mounted by the UK gov aka BBC.
Scotland could be the Saudi Arabia of Europe (admittedly without the sand, camels and sushine – although the wee-frees could provide the religious element).
Jokes aside, I wonder if some in Wezzie have worked this out & are making sure it never happens.
Speaking as a 3/4 Englishman (1/4 Irishman) I would be in favour of a split that benefitted both nations. Sadly I suspect that like Putin, the English prefer a zero sum game.
I witnessed this kind of hidden Westminster interference back as a teen shadowing an MP who was very involved in both Scotland and Northern Ireland back in the mid 1970s. Looking back it was shocking just how unquestioned and brutal the political imposition of the primacy of English rooted desires was. I learned much over a fractured life by too often being the naïve fool amongst malicious monsters.
I’m afraid it’s nothing new. Especially since the question of Scottish Independence reared its ugly head. They, the British Establishment, got such a scare in 2014 that their mouthpiece, the B.B.C, are now under orders, either to ignore, or denigrate, any supporter of that movement. Why? Because without the natural wealth of Scotland, England would be in a much worse state that it is at present.
Duriing Indyref 1 in 2014, BBC London immediately parachuted in Jim Naughtie as their safe pair of unionist hands for the BBC Radio Scotland Toady equivalent ‘Good Morning Scotland’.
They wanted very strict editorial control of this output, not dissimilar to the SLabs being a ‘branch office’ for London based Labour, and achieved this. Brown had a lot of coverage for his appalling ersatz devo max at the end of the campaign, but then he and Naughtie were close friends.
They also imposed an added layer of very heavy editorial control from London.
Though there is often much criticism of Radio Scotland, GMS is usually much better than Toady, with its Home Counties bias, and far less Tory biassed.
The presenters are not all arrogant self appointed meropolitan elite, and we have superb foreign correspondents like David Pratt brought in to provide analysis.
The local BBC Scotland folks at Pacific Quay were livid, and rightly so, as they were thought to be nativist and therefore expected to be biassed in favour of Indy, and also professionally unable to provide an even handed commentary.
Some commentators are certainly unionist, but many are not, and they probably reflect the 50/50 spilt.
There are a few SLabs in there, (but DRoss usually gets a good going over these days.)
As far as the London media goes, as for most of England and Wales, Scotland’s position is that it is fine for metropolitan second home owners, such as Andrew Marr, to pretend intimacy with Scottish affairs, but really there is a post-colonial mindset at BBC editorial level, which has got worse as the BBC has been infiltrated by Tory placemen.
We really are still treated as a colony, and appropriation is still the post imperial MO, just as Thatcher extracted £300bn of North Sea oil revenues for tax cuts for her wealthy chums.
Yet, the ignorance of Scottish matters goes much wider than the BBC.
The Guardian is often miles out too, they recently sent a Scottish but London based reporter up here for a feature, though they do sometimes get Dani Garavelli in for reasoned comment, and the right wing mainstream press is utterly dire on Scottish affairs.
Sadly Richard, this is exactly as expected from the BBC. By it’s very nature, it is a unionist propaganda machine, Anyone watching trhe news on BBC Scotlandcould be forgiven for thinking that literally nothing works in Scotland that has anything to do with the Scottish Parliament. I can remember a time when the BBC could be cosnidered a mostly reliable source of news. Those days are sadly long gone now
Well, thanks Richard for pushing this. It needs to be said. The best journalists and interviewers the BBC had, have long gone (people like Derek Bateman or Isobel Fraser – now they specialise in overgrown school children. It has to be deliberate – biddable gophers). The best and most forensic, direct, dogged, discomfiting interviewer in Scotland is Colin Mackay (STV). He once interviewed Rishi sunak, and brought out Sunak’s shiftiness.
If you think news BBC broadcasting is bad in Scotland, and does damage to the body politic, think about what it means, if you actually live in Scotland. The BBC still dominates News in Scotland. Douglas Ross receives more coverage and better treatment than any other political leader. How does that change? When Labour wins the election. Then it will be wall-to-wall Anas Sarwar and Keir Starmer. That is how it works; as long as it is Unionist…..
Interesting contrast between my comment, and tony’s. Ross only receives some modest criticism from the BBC, when there is a media bandwagon, following one of Ross’s endless gaffes. The BBC has to accommodate the News Agenda set by the rest; it is how they interpret impartiality. But the basic menu is soft on the sitting government’s leaders; unless there is a bandwagon to join, near the end.
DRoss got a roasting this morning on GMS.
He was permitted to shoot himself in both feet.
The palpable silence from his interviewer after he had so evidently messed up the justification of his own selection was damning.
As he is so utterly inept and predictable, most Scottish correspondents, both BBC and ITN, allow him to self destruct.
I have never seen or heard (and we’re GMS and not Toady listeners) any interview with Scottish media with DRoss that has ever validated him, suggested credibility, or elevated his status higher than Tory numpty. Carlaw gets similar treatment.
However, Ruth Davidson definitely did succeed in getting a high positive profile for the Scottish Tories, probably down to having been a BBC insider, and because she actually was a communicator by trade.
Her significance politically certainly was boosted by the light touch interviewing she had from Scottish media. She still managed to crash and burn though, despite her current sinecure.
Silence is the closest the BBC comes to putting Ross on the spot. At the same time nobody can insulate Ross from his gross natural incompetence. Compare the BBC with Colin Mackay, who is direct, to the point, and doesn’t let go: “David Duguid wanted to be the candidate. You sacked him on his sickbed”. And repeated. Mackay’s method reminds me of Jeremy Paxman’s method: ask the same question twelve times, and establish the responder’s clear evasion. As Paxman summarised his approach, which is unique to politicians: “Why Is This Lying B*****d Lying To Me? “.
I agree this was a better interrogation by the BBC; but it was atypical, laid on a plate, and the Conservative election is quite obviously collapsing across the board, and at pace. Even Conservative Press are deserting them. Perhaps the BBC is also beginning to notice that its own failings in Scotland on impartiality are increasingly being noticed. I do not think you can point to many similar challenges. The interview was also presented in very quietly. Some listenrrs will probably miss the significance Ross was asked awkward questions, but not put under pressure. SNP and other politicians are put under more assertive, aggressive pressure, even than Ross today. The environment of partiality is created by more nuanced means than a text would ever reveal.
The BBC has not been fit for purpose for a long time! Why do we even put up with it? We need to stop funding it and see if it could survive on its own.
Hang on – most of the alternative are worse
Let’s go for reform
Definitely not fit for purpose, but given the choice, I’ll take the BBC over-playing its hand before any private broadcaster employing capable shills for the right/Union.
The belief that England owns Scotland is the short answer.
The BBC is an English government (whether red or blue) agent. The spreaders of disinformation, scare stories and every other dirty trick in the book to keep us from leaving, dumping the Treaty of Union and, by extension England, in the doodoo.
England would then just be an ordinary, medium sized country – nothing special. That would never fit with the view it has of itself as a mover and shaker.
There’s a Treaty but successive English governments view Scotland as a chattel and provider of wealth to them and their buddies. They love Scotland for its resources but absolutely hate the Scots because we – and the Treaty terms – block a complete takeover (although that hasn’t stopped the Treaty being broken time and time again). There are also plenty of us who just won’t wheesht about the situation. The young are becoming more aware of this and are more likely to vote for independence, which explains why the English government blocks another referendum.
We are jailed in our own country unable to break free from the neighbours.
Scottish people were living in abject poverty when oil was discovered, in the 70s, and the wealth stolen. When I started work as a teenager at that time, in Glasgow, you would never have thought that Scotland was a wealthy country there was devastation and deprivation everywhere. That was true of every village, town and city. The money was sucked into the pockets of the spivs, wide boys, politicians and their pals in London and South East England whilst our country suffered and, indeed, continues to suffer from lack of investment, high cost of living, relatively low wages and stagnant population.
Oil and gas continue to be removed from our country and underground cables take power, generated in Scotland, to England whilst Scottish householders pay high charges for gas and electricity – higher than those in England’s south east. Fair, eh?
England sucks Scotland dry as it has done to every other country it colonised over the centuries.
Water will be next since England can’t provide enough clean water for its population. No need to detail why. What a shambles!
I don’t know who it was who referred to two countries, one much bigger than the other, as like a mouse being in bed with an elephant but that holds true for Scotland.
It’s long past the time that our wealth and taxes were fully utilised for Scotland and the Scottish people, not used to keep afloat the country next door.
Oh yes, water and renewables are the next resource extraction from Scotland. Shameful.
I don’t mind if we sell these at a fair price, and don’t despoil our landscapes, but sadly these are is unlikely. I already pay a premium loaded price for my domestic electricity despite our own self sufficiency.
Thank you to Richard and, in particular, Alex, John and Tony.
Having come across Marr, Sarah Smith and Jo Swinson, for work purposes in London, other than accent, I found nothing Scottish about them. They seem at home in London, or the likes of Notting Hill to be exact, and utterly uninterested in Scotland. They are ultra remainers, but appeared to know little about the EU.
I do not think you are right about what they know about Scotland. What they choose to do about it, however is quite another matter. The strongest Unionists are typically Scots. I keep having to say this: the power keeping Scotland in the Union, is the Scots, and it needn’t even by a majority; just the sufficiently determined and influential minority. The subtleties of Scotland are easily missed. As for the smooth transfer to London? Standard procedure. I spent ten years in the South East, assisting in building a business. I spent a lot of time in the City, one way or another as a user of its resources, and lived in Surrey; I understand what you imply, but you overestimate what that implies. Most of the hyper-dogmatic Scottish Unionists, even those in the business community (perhaps especially in the business community – outside the finance sector), have probably never lived in London. Their children are more likely to live there, than they are.
Thank you, John.
I said uninterested. The London based Scots.
It’s not even necessary to waste time listening to the EBC, a glance at the Scotland section of the news website will suffice. It is relentlessly negative or trivial. Clearly we Scots are too thick to understand that we are being played by superior intellects.
A couple of years after the ’14, Professor John Robertson (media studies WoS university) published a very long, detailed report about bias in the coverage of the referendum. The BBC public response was that he had used ‘flawed methodology’ in his statistical analysis. So, I wrote to the BBC and asked if they could expand on that. I have sufficient background in statistics to (probably) understand the arguments. Some weeks later, the BBC wrote back and said ‘no’.
I raised a formal complaint with the BBC. Some weeks later they responded by telling me they had no obligation to explain what they meant, so my complaint was rejected. Somewhat astonished, I pursued the matter. The BBC’s last reply was that I should ask Professor Robertson what the problem with his arithmetic was, while of course not actually saying what they thought was wrong.
Prof. Robertson did send me the huge spreadsheet. I could not find fault with it.
I understand tha Ireland pays one fifth of the cost per head of population as Scotland, for all the BBC’s output. I’ll take that deal…..
Thanks
David, that seems all too similar to the BBC I’ve come to know; arrogant and unwilling to accept criticism as they never get anything wrong.
However, my main point is this; if Scotland is such a drain on England, why don’t those ever so nice people in the patriotic Tory party get rid of Scotland and save their taxpayers a fortune? Tell us to get lost, sling our hook, get on our bike. I’m sure that eventually we’d learn to stand on our own two feet and England would be free of the Scottish burden (a white man’s burden?) and would flourish forever after…
Ignoring the SNP? They might be grateful for the lack of coverage – there are many critiques from indy quarters which show them in practice and ability to be very far from being ‘a party that wants to make Scotland independent.’
Not at grassroots level
See Robin McAlpine, Wings Over Scotland etc – SNP have not been listening to grassroots or bringing their ‘A’ game for quite some time
I am completly aware of that. I know and like Robin, too.
If you read my comments moment in The National you will note it is far from pro-SNP and I have been very critical of it on many issues, most especially currency.