Alastair Campbell on The One Show
Discussion
I would like to know how much the BBC have paid that t
t Campbell to be a 'roving reporter' on today's One Show. In the last couple of weeks, this odious toad has appeared on TV several times (Q time and the One Show as the main guest - both BBC), I assume it is in pursuit of publicity for round two of his memoirs.
He did more to destroy public confidence in Politics than anyone else in our history. One assumes this is yet another example of the BBC showing its true colours (RED). He clearly has contacts in the Beeb, I suspect he needs the money!
I seriously detest that man.
t Campbell to be a 'roving reporter' on today's One Show. In the last couple of weeks, this odious toad has appeared on TV several times (Q time and the One Show as the main guest - both BBC), I assume it is in pursuit of publicity for round two of his memoirs.He did more to destroy public confidence in Politics than anyone else in our history. One assumes this is yet another example of the BBC showing its true colours (RED). He clearly has contacts in the Beeb, I suspect he needs the money!
I seriously detest that man.
I found this rather interesting. Is there anything about Campbell that is not questionable?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1351529/...
On the other hand given a big enough ego would he care?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1351529/...
On the other hand given a big enough ego would he care?
mercGLowner said:
I would like to know how much the BBC have paid that tt Campbell to be a 'roving reporter' on today's One Show. In the last couple of weeks, this odious toad has appeared on TV several times (Q time and the One Show as the main guest - both BBC), I assume it is in pursuit of publicity for round two of his memoirs.
He did more to destroy public confidence in Politics than anyone else in our history. One assumes this is yet another example of the BBC showing its true colours (RED). He clearly has contacts in the Beeb, I suspect he needs the money!
I seriously detest that man.
Switch the t Campbell to be a 'roving reporter' on today's One Show. In the last couple of weeks, this odious toad has appeared on TV several times (Q time and the One Show as the main guest - both BBC), I assume it is in pursuit of publicity for round two of his memoirs.He did more to destroy public confidence in Politics than anyone else in our history. One assumes this is yet another example of the BBC showing its true colours (RED). He clearly has contacts in the Beeb, I suspect he needs the money!
I seriously detest that man.
off!LongQ said:
I found this rather interesting. Is there anything about Campbell that is not questionable?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1351529/...
On the other hand given a big enough ego would he care?
Love that - thanks.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1351529/...
On the other hand given a big enough ego would he care?
Eric Mc said:
He's a journalist by profession. In what grounds should they NOT employ him?
That they already have in-house journalists and cannot justify buying in someone from 'outside' with their tax funding - especially if that someone is only really there for product placement (their latest book) by whatever means are possible.At one time they may have baulked at the person's moral credentials too but that time seems long ago now. And of course the pre-requisite of impartiality .... also long dispensed with.
Eric Mc said:
Hardly any of the journos they use are "in house". The bulk of them are freelance.
However, none of the other tame journos/experts are quite so contraversial, thuggish, dislikable or politically motivated. Having him do a piece on phone tapping, when he himself was an ex Editor of a 'red top' newspaper (and has probably also been part of dubious practices in search of scoops) is akin to Robert Mugabe doing a film on the impoverishment of white farmers in Zimbabwe!Eric Mc said:
Hardly any of the journos they use are "in house". The bulk of them are freelance.
Indeed but they are at least 'regular' rather than 'occasional'. I'm sure there were, of course, many reasons for setting up such 'permanent' freelance contracts. After all as I recall it was John Burt, as the then Director General, who popularised the concept. I think the phrase was 'tax efficiency' at the time.mercGLowner said:
However, none of the other tame journos/experts are quite so contraversial, thuggish, dislikable or politically motivated. Having him do a piece on phone tapping, when he himself was an ex Editor of a 'red top' newspaper (and has probably also been part of dubious practices in search of scoops) is akin to Robert Mugabe doing a film on the impoverishment of white farmers in Zimbabwe!
Don't like him - don't watch him.That's the route I'll take.
Eric Mc said:
He's a journalist by profession. In what grounds should they NOT employ him?
I suppose because he has been one of the most underhand, dishonest journo-politicians in history, which would make right minded folk see the irony in him doing a report such as he did and, one would hope, the BBC.But then again, it is the BBC..................
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff