ANOTHER BELATED RECOGNITION BY THE BBC

‘The Guardian is their bible and political correctness their creed.’

Michael Buerk

SO WE FINALLY HAVE A KIND OF ADMISSION from the BBC’s director-general, Mark Thompson, that before 2010 the BBC shied away from the subject of immigration, in case they either upset the then Labour government or lived in fear of helping with the BNP recruitment drive.

            To try and blame the previous government for the silence, and for feeling intimidated by charges of association with the BNP, just will not wash. The culture of political correctness was indeed launched in 1997, and it has been all pervasive within  our culture ever since: and yes, the previous government could be intimidating; especially if they controlled your purse strings. But as Jenny McCartney, writing in today’s Telegraph says :

            “…it also seems reasonable that if there is going to be a very sharp rise in immigration in a very short time – as there was under Labour, when just over three million legal immigrants arrived in 13 years – there should at least be an open discussion about how many can be welcomed without flooding the job market and putting an unsustainable strain on health and education systems. Immigrants don’t tend to compete for the jobs of BBC executives…”

            Ms McCarthy makes the point wonderfully. Legal immigrants, because of the last Labour government, flooded into this country. In doing so they burdened our system of welfare, education and health. Our population is due to reach 70 million before the middle of this century. It is now being doubted that the NHS will exist in the near future… on top of the numbers of immigrants, we have human longevity and expensive advances in medicine to cope with.

            The last government was allowed to plan, oversee and implement this catastrophe because our media balked at being called racist, and so kept its silence while New Labour planned this influx of their working class (by now being called chavs) replacements; hoping they would be rewarded for their efforts come the next election and the one after that, ad-infinitum.

            It may be true that the whole media were in hock to such a fear as Mark Thompson describes. But as far as the BBC are concerned no such fear ever existed at the time. It never existed because the vast majority of the BBC’s employees were sympathetic to the cause of political correctness and Multiculturalism.

            The BBC has a liberal establishment, and remained so throughout the Labour years in government. I find it incredulous that Mark Thompson should align himself and his institution with other media outlets when coming up with a reason for the BBC’s silence.

            I can remember an ex-employee of the BBC (whose name I cannot remember) describing the many copies of the Guardian that lay around the corporation belonging to various  employees. I can however, remember when Grieg Dyke, the pioneer of BBC Multiculturalism, left the corporation. His staff turned out for him, many in tears at his departure.

            Last April Michael Buerk, the veteran news broadcaster and correspondent for the BBC attacked the corporations political correctness. He was, at the time, reviewing a memoir by his former colleague Peter Sissons who had written that the BBC is warped by the prejudices of its staff.

IF ANYTHING, the BBC did the last government’s bidding willingly and without complaint when it came to the promotion of liberal causes such as Multiculturalism and its concomitant –immigration. To try and suggest, as Mark Thompson does, that his institution was the unwilling victims of political correctness, when most of his staff were true believers, is beyond belief.

            The BBC is paid for by every citizen whether taxpayer or not on penalty of imprisonment. There is no other democratic country in the world that demands such a tax. But, despite collecting from the whole population, the BBC does not reflect the opinions of the whole nation; rather it represents a liberal minority who set the corporation’s as well as the nation’s agenda.

            This minority are not acting as party politicians (although they do favour Labour and the Liberal Democrats as well as modern ‘Conservatism’). What they represent is the embodiment of ‘progressive’ political liberal values; and every director general now serves this particular master - including Mark Thompson.

            The BBC has been up to its neck in the kind of social engineering that the last government introduced. The employees working at the BBC fully supported such an agenda. Grieg Dyke, their favourite, did after all begin the BBC’s programme of social engineering, by insisting that positive discrimination should take place; and it continues today under Mark Thompson’s oversight of the corporation.

            Minorities have been fast tracked to celebrity within the BBC. No matter what the outlet; whether it be News or Soaps; Multiculturalism must have its full representation, even if, as with soaps, it bears little semblance to reality. This is because, like the old Soviet state broadcasters, an ideology is being driven home under the disguise of popular entertainment.

            Mark Thompson is an out and out fraud if he blames the previous government for the corporations silence on immigration, or its own nervousness regarding the BNP. The institution he oversees is as culpable as the last government – no ifs or buts.

EVEN IF THE GOVERNMENT is his corporation’s paymaster, should not Mark Thompson’s first duty have been toward the tax payer who provides him with his annual £3 billion funding?

             But as we now know, the culture at the BBC supports the liberal agenda in every political or cultural department, and Mark Thompson, like his predecessors, also supports such an agenda. By blaming the previous government for the BBC’s lack of coverage of immigration is feeble in the extreme.

            The BBC is not like other media outlets, who may have genuine fears about the immigration agenda. But those fears, whether grounded in reality or not, are genuine and not put forward as an excuse for the liberal attachments of their workforce.

            I have no problem with a politically biased media outlet, whether from the Right or the Left; providing they do not use general taxation for the purpose of promoting their ideology and establishing it in the minds of their viewers or listeners; as the Soviet Union spent 70 years trying to do.

            If the BBC were a small ‘c’ conservative body, then they could at least boast that their programmes were in tune with the small ‘c’ conservatism of the nation as a whole. But instead the BBC has become the cultural mouthpiece of that great minority known as liberal Britain.

            I have no intrinsic abhorance of the BBC as an organisation, providing they pay their own way like most other media outlets. Then they can represent whomsoever they like. But if such an organisation draws its income through general taxation, then they had better represent the majority view of its taxpayers, instead of the politically correct views of its staff as well as the rest of liberal Britain, whose numbers fall well short of any kind of majority in this country.

            Mark Thompson is trying to separate his own personal oversight of the BBC from its involvement with the previous Labour government’s agenda. By playing the innocent victim on behalf of the BBC, as he seems to have done if one reads Jenny McCartney’s piece; then it will not wash. He diminishes whatever talent he has by such a strategy of self-preservation.

            The BBC has become the creature of a minority point of view and has arranged its whole programming on the basis of such a view. Its many thousands of employees, whose job applications, no doubt provided advertising income for the Guardian, share the agenda that Mark Thompson now dismisses as the agenda of the previous government.

I GENUENLY BELIEVE AND HOPE THAT the BBC’s days are numbered. In the modern world ‘public broadcasting’, if it is to exist at all, should not persecute the general taxpayer in order to guarantee its existence. But like all other broadcasters it should survive in the market place. The market place decides the worthiness of a project by making it profitable.

            If the BBC, in its current form, were to abandon its privileged existence and decide to go it alone without the taxpayer being made, by law, to oversee its subsistence; then the BBC would have to rely upon the financial resources it could garner, as a liberal institution, from living within the market place.

            So if liberal Britain supported such a channel; then they would no doubt be prepared to pay for it. But the channel they would be left with would be a mere miniature of the current setup. In other words the liberal elite who hold total sway over every feature and characteristic of this nation, would be reduced somewhat by the BBC’s only option of joining the market place.