Quick question, and I don't mean this in any way argumentative or antagonistic - but why do you allow journalists to annoy you or wind you up so much?
Can't you just you know, ignore them, not read them or whatever.
That really is quite a remarkable article. After you extract yourself from the endless rhetoric and unsupported statements (like 'Our press overwhelmingly supports the Tories and is intolerant of even mild deviations from rightwing orthodoxy.', as an example) you realize that the point he is making is that someone cannot do his job effectively because he holds views that I don't agree with.
And he's a liberal. :hehe:
Politics matters, because we all luve with the consequences. The fellow in question peddles a line which is clearly appealing to the weak-minded, the lazy and the feckless (what he call 'Labour voters') and he could potentially be partly responsible for this country and its once-proud inhabitants being crushed under the merciless heel of a McDonnell-led communist dictatorship.
It's important stuff, sw. Our freedom is worth fighting for.
Tim Montgomerie just summed it up rather nicely:
"The Corbyn Left’s intolerance of alternative views is already unattractive - in opposition. Could become dangerously unhealthy if ends up in power. (Always true of ppl with absolutist sense of their moral superiority)."
These people are dangerous.
The issue is more the BBC insist it? We have an unrealistic expectation of objectivity when it comes to the BBC which tends to demand either fake neutrality or centrist consensus- which is, of itself, a clear form of bias.
It would be tough to find a journalist to host a political show on TV who didnt have a background on one side of the fence.
The fuss is because this is an explicit and concerted attempt to remove a journalist from a role not because of how he does his job, but because of who he is and personal views he may hold. We are essentially being told that the possession of certain political ideas makes one unsuitable for a role with the state broadcaster. It's a straight-up authoritarian move by Jones at the behest of his masters.