FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Time for BBC to sack Andrew Neil
Time for BBC to sack Andrew Neil
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"What did he lie about? " as he’s chairman of the spectator magazine, he lied about printing two articles in particular, 1. A praiseworthy article of Golden Dawn , a Greek Neo Nazi organisation , just denied it completely 2. Article complaining of “not enough Islamophobia “ in the Tory Party Was just horrid and rude saying Jones was slandering him | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Jones as always tried to hijack the show the guy loves the camera lol" Jones like him, his political views or not has a pretty good and accurate memory so if Neil didn't want him on why then get him to do a piece on the recent harassment of him, Soubry and others etc.. To them not allow him to answer after Neil himself asked the question was bizarre.. | |||
"Neill shouted down Jones throughout most of Jones appearance on This Week , until Jones wanted to talk about The Spectator , when Neill really SHOUTED and basically wouldn't let Jones speak , even though the debate had included the role of the press ,, so it was a legitimate subject ,although prior to this I don't think Jones was allowed to say more than about 20 words without being interrupted by Neill ,,,,, however ,,, although this has obviously grabbed all the headlines , the absolutely astonishing , almost unbelievable , part of last nights programme was when Owen Jones was talking to Michael Pottillo , Jones referred to British citizens being refused NHS care , losing their homes and some being deported ,,, Portillo's response was to ask Jones if he was talking about the Windrush scandal ,,,,, how on earth could he think he was talking about anything else ????? " Yeah that was surprising, Portillo looked a bit bemused by the reality that the Windrush scandal had anything to do with his ex party and the the home sec.. | |||
"Jones as always tried to hijack the show the guy loves the camera lol"  Agree. As Andrew Neil pointed out the BBC is not a platform for Owen Jones to try to hijack for his own personal agenda. If Owen Jones wants to challenge Andrew Neil about being chairman of the Spectator there are other forums and platforms for him to do it.
It's also funny how Owen Jones keeps banging on about the far right, but completely ignored the fact Jacob Rees Moggs family was abused and intimidated by a far left wing activist a couple of months ago. Owen Jones also ignores events at the Brexit betrayal rally organised by ukip last month in December when it was people on the counter demonstration who Owen Jones would identity himself with who were arrested by police for public order offences, assaulting a police officer and carrying offensive weapons. Andrew Neil did ask Owen Jones at the end of the programme last night, why is it he considers far right activity to be terrorism and when the far left does it Owen Jones calls it 'activism'. Rather than answer the question Owen Jones went off on another rant about the Spectator. | |||
| |||
"Jones as always tried to hijack the show the guy loves the camera lol Agree. As Andrew Neil pointed out the BBC is not a platform for Owen Jones to try to hijack for his own personal agenda. If Owen Jones wants to challenge Andrew Neil about being chairman of the Spectator there are other forums and platforms for him to do it.
It's also funny how Owen Jones keeps banging on about the far right, but completely ignored the fact Jacob Rees Moggs family was abused and intimidated by a far left wing activist a couple of months ago. Owen Jones also ignores events at the Brexit betrayal rally organised by ukip last month in December when it was people on the counter demonstration who Owen Jones would identity himself with who were arrested by police for public order offences, assaulting a police officer and carrying offensive weapons. Andrew Neil did ask Owen Jones at the end of the programme last night, why is it he considers far right activity to be terrorism and when the far left does it Owen Jones calls it 'activism'. Rather than answer the question Owen Jones went off on another rant about the Spectator. "That’s why I worded the question “regardless of political leanings “. There’s absolutely no doubt both ends of the spectrum have serious problems , my point was not of guest behaviour but if your a high ranking BBC political analyst , surely you can’t be seen to be blatantly lying in regards to a related issue , regardless of how tenuous the link | |||
"Jones as always tried to hijack the show the guy loves the camera lol" Can't stand that utter cockwomble Owen Jones. He doesn't seem to understand democracy and thinks that we should all have the same political views as him. Michael Portilo made a very, very valid point about his argument - and he didn't like it. Quite rightly made the comparrison between far right and far left. In my view, theblittle shit got exactly what he deserved. | |||
| |||
| |||
"OWEN JONES: ”Anna Soubry and I were called traitors. When a far-right fanatic killed Jo Cox, they said ‘death to traitors’.” ?[Phrases like] ‘Traitor’, ‘enemies of the people’ and ‘crush the saboteurs’, all end up on the front page of newspapers and then are regurgitated by these people.” “You are beyond naive if you think the media doesn’t have a role in it.” ANDREW NEIL: “I am many things Owen Jones, but I am not naive.” JONES: “You are. The Spectator is a classic example...” NEIL: “I knew you were going to bring that up and I won’t let you hijack [the BBC]. Your smears and lies about me are not going to be dealt with tonight so just move off it. I’m not going to let you hijack the BBC to do this, it’s got nothing to do with them.” JONES: “I will finish my point about The Spectator.” NEIL: “You won’t.” JONES: “That magazine has defended Greek neo-Nazis.” NEIL: “No it hasn’t.” JONES: “It has...” NEIL: “No, you’ve ran out of time, you’ve failed to answer the question.” JONES: “Well, everyone can look at the record of The Spectator which has incited racism against Muslims and refugees and backed Greek neo-Nazis.”" bob remianers on here called leave voters traitors and racists and you know this because you defended me when I was called this on here would you call them remianers far left ? | |||
"OWEN JONES: ”Anna Soubry and I were called traitors. When a far-right fanatic killed Jo Cox, they said ‘death to traitors’.” ?[Phrases like] ‘Traitor’, ‘enemies of the people’ and ‘crush the saboteurs’, all end up on the front page of newspapers and then are regurgitated by these people.” “You are beyond naive if you think the media doesn’t have a role in it.” ANDREW NEIL: “I am many things Owen Jones, but I am not naive.” JONES: “You are. The Spectator is a classic example...” NEIL: “I knew you were going to bring that up and I won’t let you hijack [the BBC]. Your smears and lies about me are not going to be dealt with tonight so just move off it. I’m not going to let you hijack the BBC to do this, it’s got nothing to do with them.” JONES: “I will finish my point about The Spectator.” NEIL: “You won’t.” JONES: “That magazine has defended Greek neo-Nazis.” NEIL: “No it hasn’t.” JONES: “It has...” NEIL: “No, you’ve ran out of time, you’ve failed to answer the question.” JONES: “Well, everyone can look at the record of The Spectator which has incited racism against Muslims and refugees and backed Greek neo-Nazis.” bob remianers on here called leave voters traitors and racists and you know this because you defended me when I was called this on here would you call them remianers far left ? " Yeah but foxy nobody will kill you for what you say on here . MPs and journalists are the targets of extremists. The media has to careful not to invite violent extremists onto the brexit stage. | |||
"OWEN JONES: ”Anna Soubry and I were called traitors. When a far-right fanatic killed Jo Cox, they said ‘death to traitors’.” ?[Phrases like] ‘Traitor’, ‘enemies of the people’ and ‘crush the saboteurs’, all end up on the front page of newspapers and then are regurgitated by these people.” “You are beyond naive if you think the media doesn’t have a role in it.” ANDREW NEIL: “I am many things Owen Jones, but I am not naive.” JONES: “You are. The Spectator is a classic example...” NEIL: “I knew you were going to bring that up and I won’t let you hijack [the BBC]. Your smears and lies about me are not going to be dealt with tonight so just move off it. I’m not going to let you hijack the BBC to do this, it’s got nothing to do with them.” JONES: “I will finish my point about The Spectator.” NEIL: “You won’t.” JONES: “That magazine has defended Greek neo-Nazis.” NEIL: “No it hasn’t.” JONES: “It has...” NEIL: “No, you’ve ran out of time, you’ve failed to answer the question.” JONES: “Well, everyone can look at the record of The Spectator which has incited racism against Muslims and refugees and backed Greek neo-Nazis.” bob remianers on here called leave voters traitors and racists and you know this because you defended me when I was called this on here would you call them remianers far left ? Yeah but foxy nobody will kill you for what you say on here . MPs and journalists are the targets of extremists. The media has to careful not to invite violent extremists onto the brexit stage. " agree bob but it’s not just the far right that target MPs and journalists tho | |||
"Jones as always tried to hijack the show the guy loves the camera lol Can't stand that utter cockwomble Owen Jones. He doesn't seem to understand democracy and thinks that we should all have the same political views as him. Michael Portilo made a very, very valid point about his argument - and he didn't like it. Quite rightly made the comparrison between far right and far left. In my view, theblittle shit got exactly what he deserved." Portillo was off into the realms of whataboutery (as usual). He needs to stick to chatting about trains | |||
| |||
"Neil's position and performance - including last night - are unacceptable, in such a high profile publicly funded broadcaster. He has extreme political viewpoints, has been involved in some highly inappropriate political interactions over the years and shows immense bias in everything that he does. The BBC should be completely impartial - and a top political journalist/presenter there should not be permitted to continue, unless they are 100% neutral in their outlook and actions. Neil is not without great talent, nor experience but should be removed from the BBC, in the same way that he would not be allowed to continue, should he be a hard left political fanatic, without personal self-control. His treatment of Jones last night really highlighted how terrible Neil can be, despite his great potential. He seems a rather toxic individual." Funny how you seem willing to turn a blind eye to speaker John Bercow's lack of neutrality, and impartiality in what he's been upto in the House of Commons though. | |||
"Neil's position and performance - including last night - are unacceptable, in such a high profile publicly funded broadcaster. He has extreme political viewpoints, has been involved in some highly inappropriate political interactions over the years and shows immense bias in everything that he does. The BBC should be completely impartial - and a top political journalist/presenter there should not be permitted to continue, unless they are 100% neutral in their outlook and actions. Neil is not without great talent, nor experience but should be removed from the BBC, in the same way that he would not be allowed to continue, should he be a hard left political fanatic, without personal self-control. His treatment of Jones last night really highlighted how terrible Neil can be, despite his great potential. He seems a rather toxic individual." I haven't seen the clip that OP mentioned, but I totally agree with your analysis of Andrew Neil. When he is neutral, he is very good, but when his bias shows, it's appalling. I too have noticed his highly inappropriate actions over the years, and have long come to the decision that his contract with the BBC should not be renewed. The same goes for that Laura Keunsberg (sp?) and John Pinard. | |||
"Neil's position and performance - including last night - are unacceptable, in such a high profile publicly funded broadcaster. He has extreme political viewpoints, has been involved in some highly inappropriate political interactions over the years and shows immense bias in everything that he does. The BBC should be completely impartial - and a top political journalist/presenter there should not be permitted to continue, unless they are 100% neutral in their outlook and actions. Neil is not without great talent, nor experience but should be removed from the BBC, in the same way that he would not be allowed to continue, should he be a hard left political fanatic, without personal self-control. His treatment of Jones last night really highlighted how terrible Neil can be, despite his great potential. He seems a rather toxic individual. I haven't seen the clip that OP mentioned, but I totally agree with your analysis of Andrew Neil. When he is neutral, he is very good, but when his bias shows, it's appalling. I too have noticed his highly inappropriate actions over the years, and have long come to the decision that his contract with the BBC should not be renewed. The same goes for that Laura Keunsberg (sp?) and John Pinard." Just watched the clip, Sophie. I totally agree with the comment about Neil's performance as well. | |||
"Neil's position and performance - including last night - are unacceptable, in such a high profile publicly funded broadcaster. He has extreme political viewpoints, has been involved in some highly inappropriate political interactions over the years and shows immense bias in everything that he does. The BBC should be completely impartial - and a top political journalist/presenter there should not be permitted to continue, unless they are 100% neutral in their outlook and actions. Neil is not without great talent, nor experience but should be removed from the BBC, in the same way that he would not be allowed to continue, should he be a hard left political fanatic, without personal self-control. His treatment of Jones last night really highlighted how terrible Neil can be, despite his great potential. He seems a rather toxic individual. Funny how you seem willing to turn a blind eye to speaker John Bercow's lack of neutrality, and impartiality in what he's been upto in the House of Commons though. " I've seen Andrew Neil take apart people from both the left and the right with equal measure. Whilst I would agree that his political analysis tends more to favour the right than the left I don't see this as a reason for him to be dismissed from or never allowed to work for the BBC. The BBC is meant to be balanced and overall impartial. However that does not mean that every individual program aired on the BBC or any individual has to be balanced and impartial, only the overall output. With regards to Owen Jones; I really don't think he did himself any favours last night. He made some good points about how the language used by the mass media influences the language used by others in political discourse but, as is often the case with Owen, he went over the top and tried to bring too much questionably related issues into the discussion and consequently weakened his own case. What this has to do with Bercow and his ruling in the House of Commons I really don't know. It seems to me like another case of whataboutery. It also shows, yet again from the BREXIT side, a lack of understanding of how Parliament works, the conversations of the British Construction and the historic role of the Speaker. Firstly we need to clear on the issue of impartiality. The speaker is meant to be impartial on matters of policy and between parties; however the Speaker is not meant to be impartial on matters of Parliamentary Sovereignty. In fact quite the opposite; one of the main duties of the Speaker is to defend the sovereignty and independence of the Commons from the Crown and Ministers of the Crown. On the particular issue of the "forthwith" motion (which normally means the motion can't be debated or amended) I'm not sure that he hasn't created more future problems than he realises. The real problem is however that the Government too is not playing by the rules either with BREXIT and is constantly trying to achieve the result it wants without the real consent of Parliament. It's one of the Speakers primary roles to ensure that that does not happen. BREXIT asides, none of this bodes well for Parliamentary Democracy into the future. | |||
| |||
"Neil's position and performance - including last night - are unacceptable, in such a high profile publicly funded broadcaster. He has extreme political viewpoints, has been involved in some highly inappropriate political interactions over the years and shows immense bias in everything that he does. The BBC should be completely impartial - and a top political journalist/presenter there should not be permitted to continue, unless they are 100% neutral in their outlook and actions. Neil is not without great talent, nor experience but should be removed from the BBC, in the same way that he would not be allowed to continue, should he be a hard left political fanatic, without personal self-control. His treatment of Jones last night really highlighted how terrible Neil can be, despite his great potential. He seems a rather toxic individual. I haven't seen the clip that OP mentioned, but I totally agree with your analysis of Andrew Neil. When he is neutral, he is very good, but when his bias shows, it's appalling. I too have noticed his highly inappropriate actions over the years, and have long come to the decision that his contract with the BBC should not be renewed. The same goes for that Laura Keunsberg (sp?) and John Pinard." As happened with both Jeremy Clarkson and Robert Peston when they left the BBC I'm sure that itv loved to snap them up as they have great talent. The BBC's loss would be someone else's gain, and would be the same with Andrew Neil. I'm pretty sure the BBC won't be getting rid of Andrew Neil on the back of a mindless midnight rant from the likes of Owen Jones though. | |||
"Neil's position and performance - including last night - are unacceptable, in such a high profile publicly funded broadcaster. He has extreme political viewpoints, has been involved in some highly inappropriate political interactions over the years and shows immense bias in everything that he does. The BBC should be completely impartial - and a top political journalist/presenter there should not be permitted to continue, unless they are 100% neutral in their outlook and actions. Neil is not without great talent, nor experience but should be removed from the BBC, in the same way that he would not be allowed to continue, should he be a hard left political fanatic, without personal self-control. His treatment of Jones last night really highlighted how terrible Neil can be, despite his great potential. He seems a rather toxic individual. I haven't seen the clip that OP mentioned, but I totally agree with your analysis of Andrew Neil. When he is neutral, he is very good, but when his bias shows, it's appalling. I too have noticed his highly inappropriate actions over the years, and have long come to the decision that his contract with the BBC should not be renewed. The same goes for that Laura Keunsberg (sp?) and John Pinard. As happened with both Jeremy Clarkson and Robert Peston when they left the BBC I'm sure that itv loved to snap them up as they have great talent. The BBC's loss would be someone else's gain, and would be the same with Andrew Neil. I'm pretty sure the BBC won't be getting rid of Andrew Neil on the back of a mindless midnight rant from the likes of Owen Jones though. " Jeremy Clarkson is not a political journalist. I don't have an axe to grind about Robert Peston either. In fact, Google 'Robert Peston bias'. You won't find any bias charges on him. Then Google 'Andrew Neil bias'. There are TONS of links to news stories convention him. Let's not even mention the incident with Stephen Doughty. Look, I don't care what political party a broadcasting journalist belongs to. I don't want to know. All I want to see is them being professional in communicating information to the general public. There are broadcasters who do not reveal their political leanings. It's only a matter of time Neil will get disciplined in the same manner as Kuennsberg. The only reason why we hasn't been dragged up yet because as an ex editor of one of Murdoch's papers, he probably knows where all the bodies lie in a BBC news Dept which contains a high proportion of ex News Corporation employees. Journalism can be an inc3stuous occupation. | |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
"I’d give him a pay rise just for clamping the gobshite Jones lol" | |||
| |||
"I’d give him a pay rise just for clamping the gobshite Jones lol" Yeah we dont want anybody saying anything that upsets the uptight righties...Only good decent right wingers on the show from now on...  | |||
"I’d give him a pay rise just for clamping the gobshite Jones lol" Yeah the old shut up line instead of actually debating the issue's.. When did that ever work? | |||
"I’d give him a pay rise just for clamping the gobshite Jones lol Yeah we dont want anybody saying anything that upsets the uptight righties...Only good decent right wingers on the show from now on... "I don’t mind who’s on aslong as they don’t try and hijack the show bob jones thinks it’s only himself allowed to talk | |||
If I was producing a political show, Neil would be amongst the candidates I'd consider, as his skills are so strong. I'm not sure that there's anyone posted that we doubt his abilities. The issue for me is with the way that a publicly funded show supports his very right wing bias to be so heavily promoted - and I'm guessing that it would be curtailed if it was an equivalent left wing bias. Whatever the whatevers, it is right that the BBC constrains its productions, such that it doesn't permit overall undue influence in any one political direction to prevail. Its political output has had many contributors with a right bias which, at best, operates as an unconscious bias that favours right leaning opinion. I think many of their people have consciously influenced the narrative towards the right. The centre ground is now more left than it's been imo, for quite some time - which is perhaps why this dissonance has become more apparent. | |||
| |||
| |||
