Melanie Phillips is spot on when she writes of the BBC: If it transposes a picture sequence like this to sex up a story about the Queen by transmitting an outright falsehood, just think what it is doing in the Middle East. (via Pajamas) Phillips was referring to the latest humiliation of the Beeb . The “procrustean progressive” network “misrepresented” the “actual sequence of events” (their words) in their recent sensational story of a putative walkout by Her Majesty on Annie Liebovitz.
I am not surprised the Beeb lied or “misrepresented” or whatever they call it. That’s what they do. (They are a self-sustaining propaganda outfit, just as any public broadcasting system must perforce be. As we all know, the BBC is virtually unsupervised with a mammoth budget that taxes television owners in the UK with less representation than the citizens of colonial America.) But I am a little disappointed that the Queen didn’t walk out on Annie Liebovitz. I mean who is Liebovitz anyway? A celebrity photographer! (Okay, a good one, but still just someone who goes around taking pictures of famous people.) It was more than a little funny to envision Elizabeth giving her the gate. Like the recent movie, it made me like the Queen.
PJM Home
19 Comments
1. Luther McLeod:For what it’s worth, and regardless of all the political tangents. I like, admire and respect Queen Elizabeth. Not, necessarily, for her monarchical position, but for her relative calm in the midst of twenty or so years of disaster. She has sacrificed her personal life for a tradition that many decry. But that tradition has values that are applicable to us all. The only thing that bothers me is the fact that she agreed to be photographed by Liebowitz.
The BBC is not worth words.
Jul 12, 2007 - 6:16 pm 2. Webutante:Face it, Roger, the longer we live, the more we’re gonna love and appreciate The Queen. Thank heavens for Her Majesty. We’re done when she’s gone.
Jul 12, 2007 - 7:15 pm 3. Luther McLeod:Your words may be more prophetic than you (or I) realize Webutante.
Jul 12, 2007 - 7:30 pm 4. heather:long long ago, the Queen was sneered at for her ‘dowdy’ clothes.
Now, looking at those old photos, she is the ONLY woman who well dressed!
I would like to know who invited that Annie person into the Queen’s presence anyway. I say, “off with his head!!!”
Jul 12, 2007 - 11:43 pm 5. Terrye:You have to wonder,if they would do this to the Queen, what would they do to some defenseless commoner.
Jul 13, 2007 - 3:09 am 6. Mike K:The BBC has a long history of tendentious behavior. For example, Winston Churchill was barred from the airwaves in the late 30s when his efforts to get Britain to rearm and confront Hitler got too uncomfortable for the Beeb. George Orwell got his theme for “1984″ during his time at the BBC when he observed the trend to totalitarianism by well-meaning leftists. Blair has contributed to the trend. His steadfast support in the war on militant Islam does not compensate for the nanny state he has built up in Britain in the post-Thatcher years. They are now reaping the whirlwind from decades of non-judgmental multiculturalism. Plus, of course, the collapse of education into a puddle of political correctness and multiculti nonsense.
Jul 13, 2007 - 5:56 am 7. Lem:What the BBC did here is the inevitable result of what Tony Blair described in his speech at Reuters, weeks before he left office.
” …controversy beats ordinary reporting hands down. News is rarely news unless it generates heat as much as or more than light.
…attacking motive is far more potent than attacking judgement [sic]. It is not enough for someone to make an error. It has to be venal.
…rather than just report news, even if sensational or controversial, the new technique is commentary on the news being as, if not more important than the news itself.”
In order to get this effect they have to blatantly manipulate the facts. It patently mirrors the ‘reality’ show genre. Very soon we wont be able to tell them apart.
Jul 13, 2007 - 6:19 am 8. jedrury:Lem: like the quote and, of course, Tony was speaking about the BBC.
Was in England in March 2003 at the start of the Iraq War and watching the BBC was so depressing for an American.
Overseas, now when you travel, you are hit with the BBC or CNN International; all garbage liberals ranting about Bush, American imperialism and the poor Palestians.
My motto on the press: “manufacturing and marketing the news is your mantra.” Drives my journalists friends mad.
Jul 13, 2007 - 9:19 am 9. Lem:It reminds me of Keith Oberman’s ” ..thousand days since mission accomplished” sign off. It leaves the impression the banner “mission accomplished” meant the overall mission in Iraq. The banner only meant the carrier mission witch given the nature of a ship at sea has to come to port (mission accomplished) at certain intervals whether the war is popular or not.
Jul 13, 2007 - 9:31 am 10. jedrury:The banner is put up after every mission. Keith keeps misusing it (even after it’s been debunked) because his purposes, his commentary trump the facts he purport to be shedding light on.
If this is not Orwellian I don’t know what is.
Oberfuehrer is out of bounds, over the edge.
I can not recall a TV commentator to be so viciously partisan. Television has gone to another level of partisan commentary; all the time saying “see
Jul 13, 2007 - 9:51 am 11. krothering:what Fox has done.” But, when you watch Fox,
it is conservative, but middle of the road conservativism. Hannity is balanced by Commes and O’Reilly always has on someone to jost with and offers a certain “give and take” to any liberal.
Oberfuehrer, however, is the Jimmie Swaggert of bombastic liberal outrage, mimicking Edward R. Murrow with his “good night and good luck,”
who only pits liberal with liberal. I seldom see a conservative voice on it. There is no balance on MSNBC. There is no debate.
This middle-aged black guy grew up on Hollywood images of British society, and I loved them. The old Edwardian stereotypes of cool, courtesy and understated courage struck me as intensely admirable. I was always proud to be an American, but if I couldn’t have been, I’d have wanted to be a Brit–John Steed of The Avengers, or maybe The Brigadier of Dr. Who. I knew perfectly well that these characters were fictional and the real world was nothing like this, but I still loved and admired this fictional ideal.
I think it was still inside my head back when Princess Di was killed. And I think that’s why I was so horrified by the reaction of the British public–the bathetic, whiny public hysteria. Even more horrifying was the way the whole country seemed to turn on Queen Elizabeth, pretty much the only public figure who seemed intent on conducting herself with dignity and restraint. I loved the very traits that now inspired so much hatred in her subjects.
A certain idea of England died for me that day. Just as well; it was a false idea. But still, I think it’s clear that any country who could despise someone like Elizabeth has lost something very important to its national character.
I think the makers of the movie The Queen understand this. Roger Simon seems to imply that it’s accidental that the movie makes you like Elizabeth. I think that was exactly the filmmakers’ intent. She’s clearly shown as a thoroughly admirable and sympathetic figure–isolated and a little clueless, but strong, thoughtful and brave. A few million more like her, and Britain will be just fine. And maybe even cool again.
Jul 13, 2007 - 10:26 am 12. MarkD:Unfortunately, not everyone knows the BBC are liars. Once you know that someone lies, it’s not much of a problem.
Jul 13, 2007 - 11:24 am 13. photoncourier.blogspot.com:Mike K–”the collapse of education”–speaking of which, have you seen this?
Jul 13, 2007 - 11:25 am 14. Luther McLeod:krothering
Thanks for fleshing out what I was attempting to say above. Such as “dignity and restraint” and “strong, thoughtful and brave”. Attributes we should all attempt to emulate. Well said.
Jul 13, 2007 - 11:53 am 15. Pooh:OT: Major speech on anti-Semitism in Britain by leading UK writer and intellectual Howard Jacobson (video)
Howard Jacobson’s Speech
About Howard Jacobson
Jul 13, 2007 - 12:29 pm 16. Lem:I’m not well versed on the “boycott” to witch the writer intellectual Jacobson refers to.
Nevertheless, I did enjoy the speech. From what I could tell, It was a spoken fisking of the Independent.
Jul 13, 2007 - 2:01 pm 17. valjean:Lem,
Sorry to be so pedantic, but I think your “witch” is actually “which.” (Or occasionally “that.”) Unless this is some blog lingo to witch I’m not attuned.
Your points are good — but I’ll twitch less reading them if you’ll correct this … thanks.
Jul 13, 2007 - 8:29 pm 18. ricpic:One look at Liebowitz is enough to make a sane person run screaming into the woods.
Jul 14, 2007 - 3:55 am 19. Pooh:“I’m not well versed on the “boycott” to witch the writer intellectual Jacobson refers to.”
That’s the academic boycott of Israeli universities by British academics.
There were a number of other excellent speeches including one by Princess Diana’s lawyer (also at YouTube).
The Jews of Britain are under attack. According to one distinguised refugee from Nazi Germany things are as bad as the late 1930s. I had hoped that Pajamas would cover this meeting. Obviously, they have more important fish to fry.
Jul 15, 2007 - 8:05 am