I have never had much affection for the BBC since I reached the age where my entire mindset did not revolve around being a slave to my nightmarish cocktail of hormones and I was able to think coherently about the way of the world.
They strike me as overly melodramatic and downright irresponsible when reporting world affairs half the time, but the one thing you can say for them is that it isn’t the fault of their journalists. The blogs posted on the BBC website are about six million times better than any of their televised coverage because the people writing them do not have some daytime-tv amateur fuckwit of a director bawling in their ear about making the piece more ‘heartfelt’ or trying to ‘connect with the viewer’. Something which apparently is best achieved by treating them like a dribbling simpleton who requires the use of big bold graphs in big shiny colours with a big orange reporter flailing in their general direction in order to make them understand.
They also have an alarming tendency to think themselves funny, which concerns me on several levels. I mean ok, Robert Peston is hilarious, but that’s not intentional so it doesn’t count. Take for example, the blog written by the BBCs economics editor Stephanie Flanders (who presumably was drafted in as a more manly replacement for Evan Davies). Now I don’t know the woman personally, but I’m willing to bet she’s got quite a bit up top and I’m not talking about her bra size. The poor girl has doubtless been through years of journalistic training and worked her arse off to get where she has gotten and I’m sure she’s very proud of that. So why BBC, why in GODS NAME did you call her blog ‘Stephanomics’. Whichever wool brained, cheap suited, triple skinny-latte drinking spastic came up with that should be hurled from the nearest office window with only their pretentious prêt a manger crayfish salad for a parachute.
Anyway, regardless of the unforgivably shit name, she makes an absolutely excellent point here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/stephanieflanders/2009/02/unfair_we_may_have_to_hope_so.html It’s enough to make those of us who have actually bothered to put something away rather than blow everything and get into debt cry tears of pure bile towards those who haven’t and may even end up better off for it.
Secondly, unnerving, blabber-mouthed, incoherent, yo-yoing-inflection master Robert Peston is up to his old tricks again, having written two more awesome posts for which we should all be thankful there is no audio-visual accompaniment:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2009/02/the_questions_for_the_former_b.html deals with the question of the questions fat-cat bankers should be called to account with.
And the sublime http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2009/02/bonus_buck_stops_with_brown.html perfectly sums up why the ridiculous furore over bonuses for bank staff isn’t quite the clear cut case of crusading good vs fiscal evil the majority of news organisations would have you believe.
That’s enough for now. I like all savers am off to stab myself in the eyes with the shards of my own shattered dreams…
