“Our Friends: the MSM”
It is always instructive to note what the MSM highlight in headlines and what they don’t. If anyone still believes that they’re unbiased observers and reporters rather than political activists then I have another example or two or three for you today.
First, let’s look at a poll – by YouGov – which has just come out. It’s about the handling of the pandemic and Johnson’s ‘popularity rating’ and has only made it into The Express, so far:
“Some 41 percent of Britons find the UK government’s response to the pandemic is appropriate. A further 56 percent say that it is handling badly enough to give a net score of -15, down from -6 the previous week. Alongside Mexico, this is the lowest rating with Trump’s administration below on -12. Taiwan (+87), Australia (+76) and Denmark (+73) hold the highest ratings.” (link)
We all know what to think about polls, polling and YouGov, so I’ll not go into that. However, this result is great for mischief-making by the global MSM: Johnson – bad, Trump – bad, and look who is ‘good’! The relentless campaign in the MSM against Johnson is bearing fruit. That conditions and cultural attitudes are different in different countries is not addressed. That people thought Denmark did so well when there were hardly any reports in our MSM is intriguing. That other Scandinavian country which actually did even better without Lockdown, has ‘suffered’ in that YouGov poll. If you recall that ‘Our MSM’ were full of reports denigrating Sweden for not going into Lockdown then ’tis not a surprise.
The lesson here is that biased reporting works, that screaming headlines work, and that the relentless hammering of anti-Johnson and anti-Sweden reporting works. This becomes even more insidious when one recalls that the MSM give a free pass to Labour and Starmer. No criticism of his eternal silence on any of the daily issues but praise for wooden performances at PMQs! That also applies to his attitude on the BLM riots we saw in the UK. Perhaps he’ll have something to say in tomorrow’s PMQs. Here is what he said, reported by the BBC:
“Meanwhile, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer called on the PM to convey to US President Donald Trump the UK’s “abhorrence about his response to the events”. (link)
As Labour Leader he surely can write his own letter? After all, he and his Party never hesitated to write to Brussels during the Brexit talks. But let’s stay with the BBC – the same BBC which was caught out having manipulated a photo to show horrid looking riot police facing ‘peaceful demonstrators’:
“A picture on the BBC London website originally showed a line of police officers holding back a surging crowd with the caption: “The disturbances took place outside of Downing Street after a largely peaceful protest”. However the original image uncovered by social media users showed that it had been edited down to cut out a masked man waving a large piece of wood at the officers. After receiving complaints, the cropped picture was later changed.” (link)
That wasn’t all for the BBC. Their use of language was so manipulative that they even had to change the headline:
“The BBC came under criticism for an online story initially headlined: “27 police officers injured during largely peaceful protests anti-racism protests in London”. The story was later changed to: ‘George Floyd: London anti-racism protests leave 27 officers hurt’. […] Patrick O’Flynn, the former MEP, added: “How can an event that has left 27 police officers injured merit the description ‘largely peaceful’?” (link)
Well done, BBC – job done! People will remember the original photo and headline, they won’t see the retraction. There’s one other Starmer quote, this time in The Times. It’s squeezed into an article about ‘a row’ between Khan, the Mayor of London, and Priti Patel, the Home Secretary. Here’s the forensic Starmer fence-sitting prettily:
“Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, and Nick Thomas-Symonds, the shadow home secretary, had tried to avoid a partisan row, saying that the protesters had been wrong to topple the statue in Bristol and condemning violence at the London demonstrations.” (link, paywalled)
What isn’t mentioned is that the Mayor of Bristol is Labour, and that his council had ample time to remove the statue the normal way, i.e. by a council decision, as the incomparable Sir John Redwood pointed out yesterday in a terse Diary entry (link).
Well, perhaps they didn’t have the money to do so – Labour Councils never have enough money despite their huge council tax bills. Perhaps they were happy to let the ‘peaceful demonstrators’ use equipment paid for by the demonstrators. The statue-toppling gave Khan the opportunity to attack Ms Patel – this is truly precious:
“Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor, accused Priti Patel of a “breathtaking” lack of empathy in calling for the prosecution of those who had toppled a statue of Edward Colston, a 17th-century slave trader, in Bristol on Sunday. Ms Patel, in turn, told Mr Khan that he would fail in his “duty” if he did not prevent vandalism and violence in the capital.” (link, paywalled)
Words simply fail me! Note well though how Labour and Starmer are playing this: condemning violence – always a cheap stance to take – but demand ’empathy’, demand ‘understanding’ for the vandals. ‘Tis a Labour thing: Cherie Blair did the same when asked about violence by Hamas.
Of course none of those BLM “activists” is asked why they don’t do something in their communities to stop the killing of black youths by black youths, nor is that Labour Mayor of London asked about this. Just as in the USA, “BLM” doesn’t apply to black-on-black killings – why?
Doesn’t that alone illustrate that it’s not about ‘protecting black lives’ but about rampaging and destruction, by people who have been through our wonderful ‘education’ system’ where they learned about being oppressed but not about our history. This quote couldn’t be more illustrative:
“The unidentified protester who claimed to have tagged the [Churchill] statue in Parliament Square with the words “was a racist” on Sunday told the BBC he knew that people would be angry. “I’m angry that for many years we have been oppressed,” he said. “You can’t enslave people, have the largest colonial empire in history and then try and be like ‘yeah, let’s be peaceful, let’s talk’ . . . He didn’t fight the Nazis . . . for any personal freedoms, he fought the Nazis sheerly to protect the Commonwealth against the invasion. He didn’t do it for black people or people of colour, he did it sheerly for colonialism.” (link, paywalled)
Yes – you read that right: we fought Hitler for colonialism. The BBC didn’t ask him what he knew about Hitler and the Nazi dream of ‘colonising the East’ to the Urals, or what he thought a Nazi regime would’ve done to black people.
I’m sure our surviving veterans who stormed the Normandy beaches and fought to free Europe from the Hitler oppression didn’t know they were “racist colonialists” according to that lout’s view who probably didn’t even know that June 6th was D-Day!
The dire state of our education system is going to get worse. There’s a report in today’s Times which should make all our politicians, national and local, sit up:
“In spite of significant efforts to increase the number of state school pupils winning a place there, the figure has not risen for 20 years. Oxbridge admissions from state schools peaked in 2002, at 3,343. In 2018 the number was 3,166. The proportion of state schools in relation to private school pupils has risen, but both have fallen in terms of total admissions in the period; state school pupils by 5 per cent and independent school pupils by 23 per cent.” (link, paywalled)
And why could this possibly be? Is it really just about money, and about greedy OxBridge wanting more of it rather than, well, let’s say, lack of qualification of UK school leavers? See this next:
“Between 2014-15 and 2018-19 the dozen universities with the highest entry requirements in England added 4,895 more first-year students from abroad but only 350 from the UK. The proportion of students admitted to Oxbridge from the UK has declined from 88 per cent in 2008 to 78 per cent in 2018. The proportion of overseas students at the two universities, at about one in four, is modest compared with other institutions. At University College London, the London School of Economics and Imperial College London, for example, it is 50 per cent.” (link, paywalled)
I’ll mention in passing that, just like in “Our NHS”, the top managers of unis, the vice chancellors, receive exorbitant incomes and pensions. I’ll also mention just in passing that the lowering of requirements for UK students must have a deleterious effect on our scientific community and research. That’s why we get ‘modellers’ like Ferguson …
That’s also why ‘Our MSM’ unquestioningly regurgitate PR material, especially when it’s about science: they ‘believe the science’, be it in regard to Climate, be it especially in regard to CV-19.
I’ll finish with two reports – both in the DT and not paywalled. One is about the latest ‘cry’ from the WHO, namely that there’s ‘a new peak’ of infections. 75% of those are apparently from Central and South America, especially Brazil (link). Why that means we here in the Northern Hemisphere mustn’t lift Lockdown restrictions is something the WHO doesn’t explain. Perhaps the WHO believes that somehow we’ll be able to help those countries even though our economies are tanking.
The other report in the DT is about an indirect approach investigating the CV-19 outbreak, by a team from the Harvard Medical School. They compared the occupation of hospital car parks in Wuhan in the autumn of 2018 and 2019, suggesting that the astounding difference of people attending hospitals in autumn 2019 might point to a much earlier outbreak of that virus (link). I expect that report to sink without trace.
Meanwhile, we here in the UK are being fed piffle about ‘race oppression’ by ‘Our MSM’. Questions about PHE and ‘Our NHS’ are shelved but Johnson can still be attacked. As for Brexit: that’s gone quiet at the moment but there are a sufficient number of ‘reports’ which came in over the weekend when I was off – so I’ll have a look at all of them tomorrow.