Nick Shaxson has written a finely reasoned argument that this might be true, here.
Strongly recommended.
It does, of course, accord with my own thesis about the BBC, here.
In the face of global melt down it really is time the BBC began to think a little harder.
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:
I have had my own run-in with the BBC on another question. But the pattern was the same. Uncritical publicity, often commercial, support and lifestyle posturing designed to leave viewers/listeners with the idea that not only was it a good thing but there could be nothing possibly wrong. And a complete absence either of balance or of critical questioning.
The impression I get, I may be wrong, is of arts graduates seceding a territory they just don’t understand.
“So, you know about economics, good lord, how dull you must be. You’re willing to broadcast about it ? Well, Chacun a son gout, you go ahead old chap. In with the lads at Goldman Sachs are you, well I daresay you chaps are good with the grubby money stuff” with
So while the BBC probably is left-liberal on home affairs & foreign affairs they are violently right of centre on economics with Peston fighting a rearguard action.
The nearest I’ve ever come to throwing the radio through a window is hearing, entirely unchallenged, “well the growth in the City of London which has done much to offset the loss of manufacturing”. You f-wits, it was the activities of the CoL WHICH destroyed manufacturing in this country. What part of that is hard to understand ?
I would not put the reasons for Shaxon’s difficulty past very narrow personal self interest. The BBC’s most senior people did extremely well over the same period that the debt industry bloomed under Bliar/Brown/Balls.