The BBC has been hailed as an example of a broadcaster with a reputation for balanced reporting. However, its commitment to balance contributes to beliefs that it is institutionally biased. I call that the paradox of neutrality
The BBC has been hailed as an example of a broadcaster with a reputation for balanced reporting. However, its commitment to balance contributes to beliefs that it is institutionally biased. I call that the paradox of neutrality
The Commonwealth Games takes place in Glasgow as Scotland temporarily suspends campaigning for its referendum next month on independence from the United Kingdom
The Games reminded me of the Christmas Day truce in World War One. Not that I was there personally for Glasgow or WW1. According to the legend, on Christmas Day 1914, British and German troops downed arms, left their trenches and played a football match before resuming battle.
Don’t mention the war
In Glasgow during the Games, it was very much ‘don’t mention the war for independence’. If so, the truce was successful. This was perhaps because it was not clear to either the Yes or the No campaign whether political posturing would lose much-needed votes.
Overall, the Games have proceeded in an atmosphere of scarcely- controlled hysteria. Hysteria among spectators; among adrenalized athletes gasping out their semi-coherent replies at interviews minutes after completing events (“tell us what you are feeling as poster-girl now you have failed to win a medal in your favorite event”); and above all, hysteria among the assembled ranks of the broadcast media.
Gilded and giddy commentators
The BBC had more than its fair share of gilded and giddy commentators interviewing athletes and proud parents. These were performances honed by BBC experience of numerous interviews with Andy Murray and celebrity mum Judy before, during and after Wimbledon fortnight over the last few years.
The Gold standard
Great efforts were made to preserve or even enhance the value of the gold standard. The actual events were represented as all equivalently-compelling and equivalently worth watching. After all, they all offered changes to win Gold. The prospect of winning ‘yet another gold’ was the dominant marketing offer from the start of the Games. Each session was going to be special as there were so many gold medals to be won. Somehow the discourse permitted at the same time acknowledgement of the equivalence and specialness of gold and of gold-medal winners, and the lower status silver and bronze medals . (Another image: the satirical sketch of the British class system beginning “I look up to him because he is upper class and I am middle class”).
All events are equal but some are more equal than others
I enjoyed most of the actual athletic events, particularly those that lasted fewer than several hours of running, cycling, or wheel-chairing around the track. You could keep your percentage time watching athletes up by ‘using the red button’. Otherwise you were faced with a choice of multi-tasking or taking full-on the high-intensity but very cozy chats between the assorted teams of BBC commentators and guests.
Soon our revels will be over
I multi-tasked, with mobile, tablet, and library book at the ready at all times. In a few days the Games truce will be over and the referendum campaigning will begin again.
This week Stephen Hester was removed from his post as CEO of the Royal bank of Scotland. The decision seems more politically than financially inspired
LWD has followed the RBS story since Steven Hester’s arrival in 2010. Steven Hester: Villain, hero, or just an outstanding business leader?. The post is summarized below:
Royal Bank of Scotland took its turn this week as another giant banking institution paying ridiculous bonuses while still in hock to the Government’s bail-out scheme. Its leader Steven Hester is reviled as another fat-cat financial leader insensitive to public opinion. Contrition is a rather hard emotion for a leader to fake. So when one of them appears to be making a good fist of apologizing without appearing a pathetic wimp and maybe a bit of a damp rag as a leader, it’s worth taking a more careful look. The broadcast [March 2010] showed the BBC’s Hugh Pym asked RBS’s CEO Stephen Hester, why were there still such big losses for RBS. In three minutes, Henson left me with the impression of someone capable of a mix of toughness and sensitivity as a leader.
Three years later it was well-known that he had taken a cut in earnings to take on one of the most challenging jobs in the Financial world and that the bank has made an impressive turnaround under his leadership.
The politics of Hester’s dismissal
Chris Blackhurst, Writing in The Independent, offered an explanation for Hester’s departure.
that the Chancellor now needed a more compliant leader in the run up to privatization of RBS. He points out that under Hestor’s leadership the bank improved its balance sheet to the sum of a staggering trillion pounds sterling.
As a result of volunteering, he’d become a public figure, his private life dissected, his country house photographed from a helicopter. A snap of Hester in the garb of his pastime of fox-hunting was wheeled out to traduce him as “another fat cat banker on the make, except this was one who was now being paid by us, the taxpayer”.
Yet, he’d chosen to do it and was sticking with the task. So, why wasn’t I surprised at the announcement of his going? Because his face never fitted. Behind the scenes, Hester could be an awkward customer. Softly spoken and eloquent (for a banker), he was strong intellectually, fully prepared to speak his mind, not prepared to lie down easily in front of politicians and civil servants without banking experience and know-how.
Osborne made plain his wish to be seen to begin the process of privatization in 2014 – in other words, well in advance of the 2015 general election. Hester indicated he would stay until 2015 when the bank was expected to be restored to profitability – after that, though, he was unlikely to want to remain any longer.
Hester’s reluctance has been used to oust him. It’s a fig leaf, as is the notion that while he was good at cutting he’s not someone who knows how to grow a business and he’s not a natural front-of-house salesman of the sort who would persuade [the general public] to snap up the shares. Having steered Hester to and through the door, Osborne must now find a successor. It won’t be easy.
The stock market agreed. This week RBS shares tumbled.
The sloppy and amateurish manner in which Hester’s departure was handled cost UK taxpayers dear as the shares tumbled at the market open on Thursday [14th June 2013], down almost 8.5% at one point as investors made their feelings clear at the bizarre turn of events.
The story makes interesting material for business students interested in dilemmas and interpreting the decisions made by leaders.
Sir Clive Woodward will be remembered as the England coach for the team that won the Rugby world cup in 2002. He is now a commentator for the BBC. I was particularly interested to learn insights from the thinking of a successful sporting leader. I found that over the last two weeks of rugby, he shared the human tendency to avoid challenging the reliability of his prior opinions in light of additional evidence.
Prior to the England Italy game
“It would be good for England to score five tries to put them in the right spirit for the game against Wales [the title decider, the following week]”
After the England Italy game
“The way they played against Italy is just the wake-up call to prepare them against Wales”
Before the Wales England game
“It will be tight but England should shade it.”
After the Wales England game [which Wales won 30-3]
“England will learn a lot from this defeat”
The next day
After the match, Sir Clive seemed to have had a spell of amnesia regarding his early remarks, telling the BBC
“The rest of the world would have taken notice of that, the bubble has been burst and teams would have seen who they [England] are and what they have to do to beat them.”
One English commentator pre-match had made a different assessment to Sir Clive in an article “Here’s why the whole of Wales and Scotland and Ireland want to see England humiliated”. It’s worth reading in full, to capture some of the dimensions of the “Arrogant English” charge leveled at its Rugby establishment.
More typical was the view expressed by another former England international, Mike Tindall, in his balanced analysis of why “England must be ready to face Cardiff’s cauldron of hate”
“England are by far the best team in the Six Nations. The most important thing about them is their base game. It’s of the highest standard and that will always keep you in a game.”
Image is from barryjphillips blogspot . Barry wrote a positive review of Sir Clive Woodward’s book Winning, saying he would like to deliver a pass to a rugby playing friend, but decided to retain possession.
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.
Here’s an excerpt:
19,000 people fit into the new Barclays Center to see Jay-Z perform. This blog was viewed about 150,000 times in 2012. If it were a concert at the Barclays Center, it would take about 8 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.
The success of the London Olympics has been attributed to various factors which came together partly by design, partly by accident.
The BBC as a medium for state control
The British Broadcasting Corporation played its part in shaping the cultural mood in a way that was consistent with a state apparatus for controlling communications on behalf of a ruling elite.
Marxist training camps
Did I write that that stuff about BBC as a vehicle of state control? Have I become a spokesman for the neo-Marxist group known to have its training camps deep in the rolling pastures of the East Cheshire countryside? Has a fortnight of coverage of the London Olympics finally loosened my grasp of reality?
I hope not. It’s just that I have always encouraged my students to look behind the headlines. To read stories and then to look for concealed messages suggesting a different perspective.
Behind the headlines
Applying that principle, I wanted to look at the hidden story behind the widely reported one. The official story was that of the friendly games (sometimes coupled with the crying games) which had helped bring a nation together in harmony to celebrate the highest ideals of human performance and mutual respect. In the official story, criticism was brushed aside as untimely unpatriotic.
The London Olympic Committee (LOCOG) effectively snuffed out problems that broke out. A pre-Games failure to recruit security staff morphed into an appreciation by the public of the role played by the armed forces brought in to meet the challenge.
Complaints about empty seats petered out when members of the armed forces were re-assigned to seat-filling duties.
Cynics had a change of heart
Even the contrarian views expected from The Independent and the Guardian newspapers were overwhelmed by confessional pieces along the lines of “I was prepared to be cynical about all this, but won over by … [select from: the volunteers, the tears of joy and sorrow, the police, the cheering of the crowds, the sexiness of the athletes]. Other papers just celebrated the victories. Winning gold medals was great, but silver and bronze medal winners could make for stories of pluck and heartbreak.
The Prime Minister was a one-man political cheer leader, frequently shown shouting on Team GB to greater success. He also found time to fulfil other political duties, although reporting of these was minimal.
The BBC’s role
Then there was the role played by the BBC. Its coverage began hours before each day’s events, and was continuous until hours after the competitions had ended. There were temporarily 24 BBC channels of televised reporting. Most of its journalists seemed to be thriving on punishing schedules throughout the games, with a format of discussion, anticipation of events, interviews, background stories. Oh yes, and reporting of every competition on offer. The efforts showed the highest qualities of professionalism, motivation, and discipline. The absence of advertising breaks was mostly a blessing, but did make the challenge of continuity all the harder.
How might the East Cheshire neo-Marxist irregulars analyse the Games?
The political parties all take the same line. Mr Cameron supports the entire venture uncritically. The Queen played a now famous role in the opening ceremony to consolidate her position. Other members of the royal family were expected to be present at all the main events. [It’s a tough job, but someone’s got to do it. Ed]
The BBC is simply following orders imposed by a dictatorial regime to manipulate the emotions of the oppressed masses. The armed forces are presented as friends of the people. This will come in useful after rule of law is enforced in the attempted right-wing coup planned to coincide with a succession crisis.
Did I write that?
Yes. But only as an example of an alternative view of the Olympics. I don’t think the BBC is state-controlled. Rather, it is an institution in symbiotic relationship with the State, including the licence fee arrangements. I have no doubt that discussions are continuing about which BBC employees will receive which awards in the New Year’s honours list, to go with those for Bradley, Jessica, Mo, and maybe even Andy.
Was it worth nine billion pounds?
The calculated cost of the Olympics works out at about the same per head of population as the annual BBC licence fee. How can anyone say that’s not value for money?
The fate of Rupert Murdoch’s business empire continues to attract attention globally. Leaders we deserve is providing regular updates, as the Leveson Enquiry in the UK into Government and news media relations continues
This post will be updated regularly. Earlier LWD posts include:
Leveson enquiry continues to attract media attention with Rebekah Brooks, the former Sun editor, taking the stand at the Leveson enquiry. The BBC asks whether she have been treated differently if she had she been a “grumpy old man of Fleet Street”
Her testimony suggests that the Government will face more political problems from the stories produced through the enquiry which was set up by Prime Minister David Cameron. These appear to leave the spotlight on culture secretary Jeremy Hunt, as well as Mr Cameron’s own relationship with the former Sun editor.
Selective amnesia and his status as someone on bail in connection with phone hacking hinder evidence to Leveson from Andy Coulson
Independent newspaper suggests Coulson’s evidence ‘leaves toughest questions at Prime Minister’s door’.
Personal view [TR notes for LWD]:
Coulson at times showed a grasp of the unspoken implications of questioning as well as more generally as someone thoroughly cautious and well-prepared with a few key points to make (no conspiracy; was not hired to influence Robert Murdoch’s political decisions.
Story picks up as Leveson enquiry resumes. David Cameron’s closeness to Rebekah Brooks is not particularly new.
May 3rd 2012
BskyB distances itself from its major shareholder News Corporation in a statement from its chief executive Jeremy Darroch.
May 2nd 2012
Select committee finds Rupert Murdoch unfit to run News International. James Murdoch is also severely criticised.
Committee appears to have exceeded its brief, particularly with the most damning criticism, where voting occurred along partisan lines.
The parliamentary report issued Tuesday [Ist May 2012] was far harsher than most British observers had expected. It was approved by a 6 to 4 vote, with the four members from Prime Minister David Cameron’s Conservative Party staunchly objecting to the description of Murdoch as an unfit proprietor.
The former First Minister of Scotland Jack McConnell reported as political target of phone hacking by Rupert Murdoch’s News International.
Jeremy Hunt ‘On probation’ by Prime Minister’s statement.
Telegraph reports Cameron could fire Hunt if new evidence emerges.
Leveson rejects Government plans to review Jeremy Hunt’s conduct over BSkyB bid saying “It’s not my problem”
The Guardian: Rupert Murdoch’s evidence to the Leveson inquiry was like one of his tabloids: a lively mixture of accurate and inaccurate reporting, one-eyed comment and total fantasy.
Sky News, itself part of the story reports on Simon Hughes’ call for an investigation into Jeremy Hunt’s conduct during BskyB takeover bid.
The Belfast Telegraph reports that George Osborne is facing questions over whether he was lobbied by Rupert Murdoch and played a role in supporting News Corp’s attempted £8bn takeover of BSkyB.
April 26th Murdoch
Two inter-related stories today. In Parliament, Jeremy Hunt defended his ‘quasi-judicial’ role in the BskyB bid by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation. Mr Murdoch appears before the Leveson enquiry into Media ethics.
The Independent sees the Jeremy Hunt story as “a toxic trail” leading from Jeremy Hunt to the Prime Minister’s involvement in the Murdoch bid for B Sky B.
April 25th 2012
The BBC continues its reporting of the Leveson enquiry with a ‘What the papers say’ review.
The Daily Telegraph examines the testimony of James Murdoch [24th April 2012] to the enquiry concluding that the Government’s relations with the Murdochs are coming under close scrutiny and ‘revealing a lack of candour’
The Guardian focuses on another close political relationship: between Rupert Murdoch and Alex Salmond
April 23rd 2012
Plainly, Mr Murdoch took the view that publishing a book which was critical of the Chinese leadership would not improve his chances [of expanding his business interests in China] , so he instructed HarperCollins to drop the book on the grounds that [the book] was no good”.
Image of Rupert Murdoch is from livetradingnews.com
The New York Times captured the symbolic dimension to the story neatly:
Prime Minister David Cameron’s ride on a retired police horse in the Oxfordshire countryside appears, for now at least, to lack the elements of a full-blown scandal. But as political symbols go, the horse and its links to the tabloid newspaper scandal roiling the country seems likely to become, at the least, rich fodder for political satirists and cartoonists. In Brussels on Friday [March 2nd 2012], Mr Cameron was peppered with as many questions about Raisa, the horse, as about Britain’s refusal to sign on to a new treaty.
Henry 5th and all that
It set me wondering about the potency of horses in narrative. Where better to start than Shakespeare? The hero king Henry 5th and the villain Richard 3rd are tales retold as great movies with the monarchs and their nags as the stars.
The story seems to have attracted the press after initial press statements had appeared to be unconvincing denials of a matter of fact, namely that the Prime Minister had ridden on a horse pensioned off from the police service and placed in the care of horse trainer Charlie Brooks. Mr Brooks is the husband of Rebekah Brooks, who is involved in the hacking stories at News International. Both are close friends of David Cameron , as is a senior policeman who may have helped in the arrangement to pension off Raisa, the nag at the centre of the story.
Beyond the rational
At a rational level, some kind of plausible explanation can be constructed. On the other hand, you might think that on a rational level there doesn’t seem much point in such an exercise. It will take a lot of effort to find serious wrong-doing. The potential of the story lies in the symbolism of a cosy group of wealthy friends using friendship to get further unpaid privileges.
Symbolism and leadership
It is a case of symbolic leadership, as portrayed, say, by Sir Lawrence Olivier mounted on his horse before the battle of Agincourt. It might also be seen as more a narrative interpretation of leadership. The symbolism is of Mr Cameron enjoying himself with his friends through privileged access to the aging Raisa. Faint echoes of Animal farm also seep into mind.
What the papers said
The whole episode offered creative opportunities for headline writers. The mirror went for losing the reins I did horse around with Sun’s old nag. The Telegraph offered
Horsegate: the PM will forever be saddled with Raisa. The Guardian went for the old cliche of closing the stable door
To be continued
The Financial Times now supplies information about its web articles with the request “Please don’t cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post”. Point noted. The battle for pay to view continues
Rupert Murdoch was among the earliest figures to recognise the importance of developing new business models for successful management of news in the era of electronic information media.
The Financial Times, (FT) is also wrestling with these issues.
The FT is part of the Pearson group, the largest book publisher globally. Pearson, led by Dame Marjorie Scardino, has risen to the challenges of the electronic age. Its recent innovations include the search engine newsift
On this issue I suggest that the FT may be misreading the way to create value from its information generating capacity. Increasingly the protectionist route is being eroded (music being the obvious example). News media are increasingly relying on social media inputs for the first signals of breaking news stories.
I remain a personal supporter (and reader) of the FT. However, as things stand at present, LWD will chose alternative sources from which to to extract information, and to critique and cite the source. What LWD does is of little importance to the FT. If a similar decision is reached by millions of web-savvy individuals around the world, it’s a different matter.
Andy Rooney, one of America’s best known TV commentators died at the age of 92. He announced his intention of standing down from the “60 Minutes” shows after what he described as “70 years as a writer”.
“My Lucky Life”
In his last regularly scheduled appearance on “60 Minutes,” Andy Rooney commented, “I’ve done a lot of complaining here, but of all the things I’ve complained about, I can’t complain about my life.”
A Cranky Voice
The New York Times described him as The Cranky Voice of CBS noting the tone of bemused frustration in much of his work, which led to censure on grounds of homophobia and racism. His output did carry with it a bluntness which offended.
Racist or victim of false reporting?
The Times article also reviewed the controversy over his alleged racism:
In 1990, CBS News suspended him without pay in response to complaints that he had made remarks offensive to black and gay people. The trigger was a December 1989 special, “A Year With Andy Rooney,” in which he said: “There was some recognition in 1989 of the fact that many of the ills which kill us are self-induced. Too much alcohol, too much food, drugs, homosexual unions, [i.e. sexual relations] cigarettes. They’re all known to lead quite often to premature death.” He later apologized for the statement.
The Advocate [A Magazine for the Gay Community] interviewed him over his comments [in Feb 1990] and printed remarks attributed to him from the interview, which he vehemently denied making. A torrent of negative publicity followed, after which then-CBS News President David Burke suspended him for three months. The outcry for his return was deafening. Burke reinstated him after only three weeks, saying Rooney was not a man “who holds prejudice in his heart and mind.”
It is not difficult to see that even the remarks he originally made would cause offense. But the dilemma of freedom of expression of opinion rumbles on. The wider corpus of Rooney’s life work and actions largely confirm his own claims that he was a closet liberal and approved of the achievement of Barack Obama in attaining the Presidency as a black American.
Other false reports persisted
The Tri Cities article continued:
Rooney was also mistakenly connected to racism when a politically charged essay highly insensitive to minorities was written in his style and passed off as his on the internet in 2003. Over the next few years, it found its way into the e-mail boxes of untold thousands, causing Rooney to refute it [although] it continued to proliferate, in an Associated Press article a year later.
Many assumed he wrote the [false article] because Rooney’s long time habit of writing or speaking plainly on sensitive topics had often left him open to attacks by activist groups. The racist essay was one of the many false Rooney quotes and essays bouncing around the internet. The racism charge angered and hurt Rooney deeply. He hated racism: As a young soldier in the early 1940s, he had himself arrested in Florida by refusing to leave the seat he had chosen among blacks in the back of an Army bus.