Naughtie Sorry for ERG Slur


Following Guido’s reporting of ERG outrage at BBC Today’s Jim Naughtie slurring the ERG as far-right types equivalent to the French Front National he apologised last night:

“I was wrong to say in a live discussion this morning that members of the ERG would be happy in a far-right party. That was not my intention, because I don’t believe it. I was trying to make the point that if our parties fracture in some way after Brexit – on Right and Left – we could see a political landscape emerge that looks more like the rest of Europe than it does at the moment. But my words were ill-chosen and I’m sorry for any offence caused”.

The ERG’s Andrew Bridgen responds “I was grateful for Jim Naugthie’s ‘almost apology’, as the referendum demonstrated the ERG’s views are those of the mainstream majority.” Quite.

ERG Slam BBC Presenter’s ‘Outrageous’ Claim They Would Be in the Front National

Tory MPs are absolutely livid after BBC presenter Jim Naughtie said on Today this morning that the ERG would be in the Front National if they were in France or the AfD in Germany:

“The ERG, Jacob Rees-Mogg’s group, in France would be in the National Front because that’s what they believe and in Germany they would be in the AfD. It’s only because of our system that the carapace of this party keeps them in…”

Former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith has slammed Naughtie’s “outrageous” comments and called for him to withdraw his “misleading and untrue” remarks:

“It’s outrageous for a supposedly neutral BBC commentator to suggest the ERG represent an extremist view. They are in fact representing the majority view of the country – that the UK should leave the EU and its institutions. Conservative politicians who feel strongly about Brexit are decent, tolerant, and completely opposed to racism in every form. Mr Naughtie needs to withdraw his remarks. They are misleading and untrue.”

No wonder people think the BBC is biased against Brexit when they come out with claptrap like that…

UPDATE: ERG whip Mark Francois said that if Naughtie doesn’t “completely and utterly” apologise he should be sacked.

“That is an appalling and disgusting slur on around 80 members of Parliament, I think that Mr. Naughtie should completely and utterly apologise, and if he doesn’t he should be sacked by the BBC. If they don’t sack him it shows what many of us have known all along, that the BBC is an utterly biased Europhiliac organisation.”

Guardian Columnist Admits She Has Never Bought A Copy of The Guardian

Guardian columnist and Corbyn favourite, Dawn Foster, confessed that she has no interest in reading her own paper. She told the ‘Media Democracy Festival 2019’ over the weekend that “I’d never watched Prime Minister’s Questions until I started working for a newspaper that I never read until they gave me a job… I’ve literally never bought a copy”. Neither has Guido lately…

Foster made the comments on a panel alongside Kate Osamor MP who famously abused a journalist by throwing water over him and threatening to hit him with a bat. Maybe Guardian readers will think twice before making a donation at the bottom of Dawn’s next column…

60% of People Think the BBC is Biased Against Brexit

Both Brexiteers and FBPErs both like to complain that the BBC is biased against their side, now the country as a whole has given its verdict and come down on the side of the Brexiteers. A new ComRes poll for Leave Means Leave has revealed that, excluding don’t knows, 60% of people think that “organisations like the BBC seem in favour of remaining in the EU and have not provided an impartial view of Brexit.” This rises to 75% among Leave voters…

The same poll found that 64% of people with a view think that “The Civil Service seems in favour of remaining in the EU and could have misled both ministers and the public with research designed to put Brexit in a negative light.” An anonymous whistleblower confirmed as much in the Telegraph this morning. The British people know an establishment stitch up when they see one…

Remain Campaigners Are Massively Outspending Leave Campaigners on Facebook

New spending figures released by Facebook have revealed that since October the top five anti-Brexit lobby groups have spent 60% more than than the top pro-Brexit groups. Anti-Brexit campaigners have spent over £711,000 promoting targeted anti-Brexit messages…

Despite this figure dwarfing the £444,000 spent by the top pro-Brexit campaigners, there have been little to no media reports about scale or source of these funds, or the motives of those bankrolling it. Disconcertingly, the anti-Brexit groups have also ran £37,926 worth of Facebook ads without a disclaimer, further undermining the accountability of the anti-Brexit lobby. Where’s Carole Cadwalladr on this..?

The biggest spending anti-Brexit groups according to Facebook spending data were…

The biggest spending pro-Brexit groups according to Facebook spending data were…

The hysterical noise around pro-Leave groups in the left wing media is totally unjustified…

Theresa May’s Tossing Tax

Amongst the Brexit drama it’s easy to miss that an extraordinary anti-freedom, anti-personal responsibility set of regulations under the Digital Economy Act come into full force next month. From April, any internet service will face fines and consequences if pornographic material can be accessed on them by anyone under the age of 18. This means if anyone wants to watch porn in the UK, they will have to do one of three things…

  1. Give your credit card details to a government approved company
  2. Buy a Government approved porn pass from a newsagent for £8.99
  3. Use a Virtual Private Network (VPN)

This means that anyone under the age of 18 will not be able to access pornography safely. Teenagers will have to either nick their parents credit cards, get an older person to buy a porn pass for them, or download the kind of VPN software used by dissidents living under authoritarian regimes, drug dealers, and child pornographers. Sexting will undoubtedly rise, with a ban making it easier for teenagers to send explicit pictures to each other than finding some on the internet, raising a swathe of new child safety concerns. Any politician thinking teenagers simply won’t watch porn is living in a fantasy world…

The consequences for platforms like Twitter or Reddit, some users of which post pornographic content, are disconcertingly ambiguous. When this has happened on some sites in the past, indiscriminate crack downs have accidentally hit vital resources for struggling teens, particularly LGBT services…

Quite apart from the child safety concerns, adults will also be driven to VPN use and the dark web audience will massively expand. People will be rightly concerned about handing over credit card details to porn companies’ age verification checkers. The leading age verification service, AgeID, is owned by the company that also owns PornHub, YouPorn and RedTube. Creating an enormous database of literally millions of credit card details linked to pornographic preferences. What could possibly go wrong..?

Having to humiliatingly purchase a government approved ‘porn licence’ is the kind of nonsense Guido would expect from an authoritarian regime. Instead of sheepishly shuffling in to a newsagents to hand over their £9 ‘Tossing Tax’, less technologically savvy adults will inevitably stumble into giving out their credit card details to nefarious actors, or downloading viruses instead of legitimate VPNs. This legislation is a fraudster’s dream…

The electoral implications will be bigger than politicians realise. The Tories suffered huge consequences from younger voters over fox hunting. Thanks to the prudish cowardice of most MPs, there hasn’t been a big uproar over this egregiously draconian legislation yet. But self reported polls suggest that three quarters of men admit to watching porn and the true number is likely to be higher. If politicians are brave enough there could be huge electoral mileage in a campaign to Repeal the Porn Laws…

Who is on Question Time Tonight?

Will Cleverly and JHB be entertaining enough to balance out Blackford?

Cox Bollocks Snow for ‘Fake News’

When Guido saw Jon Snow’s tweet he was a bit sceptical of a single source of Snow’s gaining an insight that no one else had managed. It turns out it was, to quote the primary authority, complete “bollocks”…

Who is on Question Time Tonight?

A better spread of views than many Question Times…

Brexit: Where the ‘Tory Press’ Stands Now

This morning The Spectator became the latest Brexit-backing publication to endorse May’s deal on the condition of a limited Cox concession. The full list of Brexit backing publications who are now supporting May’s deal:

  • The Express warned on the day of the first meaningful vote back in January that “pulling the plug on May’s deal might mean no Brexit at all.”
  • The Sun caved in February telling Brexiteers to “wake up” and urging that “Tory Brexiteers must now compromise.”
  • The Mail buckled in December, immediately post-Dacre, proclaiming “the only hope of salvation is Mrs May’s deal.”
  • The Spectator today, despite acknowledging how “painfully clear” it is MPs will be asked to vote for “almost entirely the same” deal that was defeated in January.

Only The Telegraph and the Sunday Telegraph are still holding out…

Carole Forced to Apologise After Being Widely Mocked by Irish Journalists

Carole Cadwalladr’s latest ‘explosive’ exposé on the cosy relationship between Facebook and the Irish Government hasn’t had the quite the reaction she was hoping for after she managed to insult the more or less the entire Irish media with this blithely condescending tweet:

As countless Irish journalists quickly pointed out, they had already paid plenty of attention to the story when it was first reported. Almost two years ago

Carole eventually posted a series of non-apologies this morning, going for the ‘my grossly patronising tweet wasn’t really meant to cause offence’ approach. Are there any other journalists she’s managed not to fall out with yet?

Project Fear Latest: Hard Brexit Will Cause More Unplanned Pregnancies

The New Statesman has published an unintentionally hilarious article by the aptly-named Dr Rebecca Grossman, a GP who is trying to hard sell the notion that no deal could lead to “more unplanned pregnancies” or even “individuals resorting to alternative methods of contraception, such as sterilisation.” Has she forgotten that Brexit was about bringing an end to protectionism?

Unfortunately it looks like Dr Grossman hasn’t actually bothered to read the Department of Health’s reports on no deal planning herself, which leave her lurid claims looking rather limp. The Government has already taken measures to open new shipping channels and procure freight capacity to ensure that all medical supplies can still get smoothly in and out of the UK even if there is increased friction at the border. In any case, trusty condoms are built with stamina in mind – they can survive on the shelf for three years, far longer than the six weeks suppliers are anticipating having to last for…

To top it all off, Dr Grossman explains how the UK’s most popular condom, Durex, has its production facilities “entirely in China, India, and Thailand” – all countries which the EU has no free trade agreements with. Another Project Fear prediction which can be safely tossed into the dustbin of history…

NHS Brexit Scare Report Written by Diehard Remain Campaigners and Former Eurocrats

Fresh from publishing their mad new diet calling for people to eat only one-tenth of a sausage and a quarter of an egg a day – which naturally turned out to be authored by people who didn’t follow the diet themselves and funded by a globe-trotting billionaire with a private jet – once-esteemed medical journal The Lancet has done it again with a new Brexit scare paper this week. It just so happens that almost every author is either a diehard Remain campaigner or has extensive professional links with the EU…

  • The lead author is Nick Fahy, now a researcher at Oxford but who previously worked for over a decade in the European Commission. Naturally…
  • Next is Tamara Hervey, an EU-funded Jean Monnet Professor of European Law who amusingly describes herself as living in “Sheffield, Europe” on Twitter. Don’t tell her Sheffield voted to Leave…
  • David Stuckler is a committed anti-Austerity campaigner who authored a book subtitled “Why Austerity Kills” and has even blamed the rise of the Nazis on austerity. Cuckoo…
  • Mike Galsworthy will be familiar to most people as one of the prolific and obnoxious Remainiacs on Twitter, he is effectively a full-time commentator and campaigner and has founded Scientists for EU, Healthier IN the EU, Scientists for Labour and NHS Against Brexit. Literally the last person you would go to if you wanted a balanced and impartial view on Brexit…
  • Martin McKee is another full-on Remainiac, his Twitter account is festooned with #FBPE and a giant low-res EU flag. McKee is also a member of the European Commission’s ‘Expert Panel on Investing in Health’ and until recently was President of the EU-funded European Public Health Association. He co-founded Healthier IN the EU with Galsworthy, and to top it off was also a co-author on Stuckler’s paper blaming the Nazis on austerity. Full house!

Naturally this hasn’t stopped the media and smug Remainers like Peston from seizing upon the report like it is gospel truth. It might as well have been a European Commission press release…

BBC’s Ill-Advised Podcast Promo

Guido can’t help but thinking the BBC could have found a better strap-line for their new podcast

H/t: Jess Brammar

How Not To Newsnight

Bit of an oops on Newsnight last night as the Yorkshire Post’s Liz Bates had to give the Nottingham Post’s Mike Sassi a cheeky little prod on camera…

Adam Boulton Accuses All Tory Brexiteers of Being “Far Right”

Sky‘s Adam Boulton has made the extraordinary assertion that Tories who support Brexit (i.e. the vast majority of the Tory Party) are “far right.” Staggering…

UPDATE: Boulton doubles down…

James O’Brien’s Brazen ‘Who Funds You’ Hypocrisy

Earlier this month, left wing agitator James O’Brien got into a protracted argument with Silkie Carlo, Director of privacy-campaigning NGO Big Brother Watch, ironically over the issue of whether they publish a list of their donors or not. O’Brien would not let Carlo talk (about the issue of facial recognition cameras) because she supports privacy rights across the board. He then let the cat out of the bag…

Carlo: “I used to work at Liberty, Liberty doesn’t publish who funds it. Open Rights Group doesn’t publish who funds it…

O’Brien: “No, but I’m not troubled by their agenda.”

This brazen hypocrisy reveals the fundamental lie at the heart of the unrelenting ‘Who Funds You’ smear campaign. It has never been about a genuine concern about transparency over who funds various charities and NGOs – big state think tanks are never challenged in the same way. It has always been a deliberately partisan exercise in trying to drive groups that the O’Briens of this world disagree with out of public debate…

BBC’s Think Tank Funding Hypocrisy

The BBC took film crews into the Taxpayers’ Alliance and Institute of Economic Affairs for a Politics Live feature today, ostensibly to help viewers “make their own judgements” about whether them making their donors public is “relevant” to their ability to take part in public debate. It quickly became clear that the BBC was more interested in portraying them as pantomime villains than letting viewers “make their own minds up”…

As the IEA’s Mark Littlewood pointed out, think tanks are far from the only organisations and institutions which frequently intervene in public debate yet do not publicly divulge their donors. Most of them in fact do so with far more clout – from Oxfam and Greenpeace to the CBI and the Corbynite Archbishop of Canterbury…

Greenpeace UK operates on a vast £21 million annual budget, the CBI on £24.5 million and Oxfam UK on a truly gargantuan £427 million, yet none of them provide fully detailed information about where their funding comes from, despite all of them having a huge influence on public debate. The IEA operates on a budget of just over £2 million and provides a clear breakdown of its income sources, even though it does not publish individual donors’ names.

This is not a case of “whataboutery”, it is a fundamental point about free speech and a balanced public debate in civil society. Attacking someone on the basis of who funds them rather than on the strength of their arguments is one of the most basic forms of ad hominem attack. Tellingly, these attacks are almost entirely one-way politically. They are almost exclusively led by the assorted cranks of the authoritarian left who are targeting those on the right as part of their broader war of attrition to purge public debate of dissenting views.

These attacks will not stop if think tanks reveal their funding. Their donors will hounded and subjected to the same sort of rabid abuse that think tanks’ staff members, particularly female ones like Chloe Westley and Kate Andrews, receive on a daily basis online, until they cave into the intimidation and withdraw their support. And Jo Coburn and other presenters will keep asking them questions on an ad hominem basis rather than engaging with the substance of their research. If a think tank has genuinely distorted their research due to outside influences, that will be evident from the flaws in the substance of the work they publish.

Faiza Shaheen, alongside Littlewood, claimed that her think tank, CLASS, was entirely transparent about its own funding arrangements. It is not. It lists its total income, as the IEA does, but it only names donors who have given over £1000, and even then it does not divulge how much each has donated. Every single named donor except one is a Trade Union.

When was the last time a single presenter challenged the integrity of Shaheen’s arguments on the basis that she is almost entirely funded by Trades Unions? When was the last time Jo Coburn herself was challenged over the fact that her career is dependent on the specific Government policy of extorting money out of taxpayers to pay her salary? They haven’t, as always it’s one rule for the right and another rule for everyone else…

UPDATE: James O’Brien has gone even further, openly admitting his entirely partisan motives in a recent interview.

Andrew Neil Nails It On Churchill as BBC Announce End of This Week

This Week began with an opening monologue from Andrew Neil that set the record straight on Churchill after the nonsense spoken about him over the last few weeks. A timely refresher that all politicians should watch…

UPDATE: It emerged overnight that the BBC is scrapping This Week after 16 years with Andrew Neil stepping down from late night presenting.[…] Read the rest “Andrew Neil Nails It On Churchill as BBC Announce End of This Week

+ READ MORE +

Media News List



Tip offs: 0709 284 0531
team@Order-order.com

Quote of the Day

George Osborne reviews his career…

“After university, I tried and failed to get a job as a journalist — and so I became the Chancellor of the Exchequer instead. And when I tried and failed to stop Britain voting to leave the EU, I stopped being Chancellor and became a newspaper editor instead. I’d had enough of the fake news, the spin and fiddled expenses of politics. So I thought I’d try journalism instead.”

Sponsors

Guidogram: Sign up

Subscribe to the most succinct 7 days a week daily email read by thousands of Westminster insiders.
“Institute for Public Interest News” is a Bad Idea “Institute for Public Interest News” is a Bad Idea
Humphrys Interviews Naked Remainer Humphrys Interviews Naked Remainer
Buzzfeed Firing Another 250 Staff Buzzfeed Firing Another 250 Staff