Friday, 15 August 2014

Response To Another Left Wing Hatchet-Job In The Huffington Post 15/08/2014

"Huffington Post Article - Nigel Farage Accuses of 'Planning Attack' As Ukip Leader Confirms Commons Tilt"

The only people who have accused the BBC of being biased towards UKIP are left wingers who have had pause due to UKIP's surge forwards in development.

Anyone with half a brain can see the media bias towards UKIP.

Every non-formal announcement article mentioning UKIP is negative (and even the formal ones have a negative undertone or mention something negative). UKIP are the only party that has members jump right to the front page for non-stories.

Take the Bill Etheridge non-story the other day for instance where the media tried to make out that he was "praising Hitler" when in reality he was just talking about him being a potent public speaker in manner.

Some weeks ago we had the story about Nikki Sinclaire and her expenses fraud charge. Let's forget for a second that Miss Sinclaire had spent the last year providing anti-UKIP headlines for the Huffington Post to feed off of. She had not been a member of the party in nearly 5 years?! Yet the media spent as much time as they could trying to reconnect her to the party as they possibly could like she had never left.

If that wasn't bad enough, at the time a Labour Party Councilor was being tried in court having been charged with abusing a little boy.

This story didn't even leave its regional newspaper, yet a story about a former UKIP member was daily news for a good 3-4 days!

During the European Elections and Council Elections, the media tried to focus on UKIP's General Election policies or members who had caused them minimal embarrassment. Completely ignoring other party members who had been charged fire arms offenses (Tories) or racism (Labour). Yet the media lapped up the cross party muck raking as if a pig in a puddle of mud and food. Fully knowing that the focus at the time should be it's local policies and European Election policies. But try as they might, the media wouldn't let them speak about the things that mattered. Regardless they got the European Elections won and won double the number of Council seats that were expected much to the utter horror of the media and other parties.

As for the number of people who complained about UKIP getting to much publicity and other claiming they got negative publicity.

I don't think many fellow UKIPers will mind me saying that compared to the likes of Labour and the Tories our support is far smaller.

The difference though is after/during the elections UKIP supporters were working for the party trying to maximize a much unexpected result.

Whilst supporters of other parties and members of other parties were going around spreading lies about UKIP policies that didn't exist (Labour), putting out fear stories about jobs being lost if we left the EU (Lib Dems) and just generally digging through normal people's twitter and Facebook accounts that were linked to UKIP in the hopes of finding any small piece of information to discredit the party (Tories). This information of course made readily available by any of the other parties and or the media.

So yes. I am sure a lot of sour people will have complained about UKIP getting publicity. 1000 people? That's what? Twice the number of people who voted in my small ward in the local council by election recently in which there was a 29% turnout (oh and UKIP won by the way!)

Don't expect me to lose any sleep at night over a handful of sour-faced staunch Labour and Green Party supporters who have nothing better to do than trying and hinder a already unbalanced electoral process.

But hey, rather than actually accept that all Parties got equal airtime even if obviously biased, the Huffington Post choose to highlight that a channel editor at the BBC News was sacked from coverage of the elections after tweeting a derogatory comment about the party.

The comment in question from the person concerned mentioning wishing that UKIP supporters and voters would "drown in acid".

Why they have raised this individual in this article as if it should never have happened is beyond me!

"More than 70 complaints were made claiming a bias against the Labour party, though there were absolutely no complaints of a bias in favour of Labour."

So 70 people made complaints of bias against Labour, whilst their were no complaints of bias in favour of Labour?

That's out of an estimated 7.8 million viewers who watched the Council Election and European Election coverage?

Why is the Huffington Post even referring to these figures. They are embarrassing.

I am willing to bet that the BBC gets more complaints about episodes of Eastenders than bias towards Election coverage.

Hell I am willing to bet that more people take to social media websites to bemoan bias in Election coverage than actually taking the time to ring up the BBC to complain about their programming.

"UKIP party members have enjoyed ample airtime on BBC shows, in particular on Question Time where Farage became "a usual suspect" in the run up to the elections."

He is the party leader.

As left-wingers gleefully conclude. Up until about a year and a half ago. UKIP was very much a one man band.

UKIP were the sole party out their objecting to UK membership of the European Union, and so it was very hard for a person to be put forward representing the party to speak on the show.

The last year however has been very different.

A blossoming range of fantastic public speakers and representatives of UKIP are available for BBC Question Time and other programs.

Diane James, Louise Bours, Suzanne Evans, Janice Atkinson, Jane Collins, Margot Parker, Patrick O'Flynn, Roger Helmer, Tim Aker, Steven Woolfe, David Coburn, Paul Nuttall, John Agnew and Amjad Bashir to name a few.

We shall have to see if the Huffington Post, BBC or other news cooperation's will actually approach these spokespeople to take part in their articles and programming.

As for any comparison to the Green Party. I fear the Huffington Post quip of "Farage has appeared on the show's panel at least 16 times since 2009 - more than the entire Green party, which has only appeared 11 times" is a bit misleading.

As the Huff's post has highlighted, Farage was primarily the only rep of UKIP who appeared on the show. So it wasn't the "Nigel Farage show", it was UKIP represented by Nigel Farage.

So UKIP 16 appearances since 2009 and Green's 11.

The UK Independence Party has a vastly higher number of Councilors than the Green's in the UK.

UKIP having 370 and the Green's having 160.

I know the Green's and others like to put forward the argument that the Green's have an MP and UKIP do not. But using that logic should the laughably titled 'Jewish hating' "Respect Party" be allowed vast numbers of reps on Question Time and other BBC programming when they have 1 solitary MP in George Galloway?

How many Councilors do they have? Yep that's right. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada!

So the argument that a party should have more representation than another party because they have one solitary MP is a joke!

Especially when you consider the state that particular City is in, and how much the Party are loathed by it's residents.

The only unfortunate thing is it's looking increasingly likely that Labour are going to take the Green's place in the hot seat as far as a Brighton MP is concerned. As much as I loathe Natalie Bennett's "anything to the right of us hating" attitude, and how they'd have little old people freezing to death in their homes due to expensive energy costs from the expensive tax payer funded energy constructions. Not to mention the apparent large contingent of anti-democratic Pseudo-Anti-Fascists who attack UKIP members whilst out peacefully canvassing for elections and attacking disabled and elderly people trying to attend UKIP meetings. This humble blogger knows that there are a few decent folk in the Green Party who have the best interests of the country at heart.

As much as I loathed Caroline Lucas ganging up with the other panelists on Question Time, I can respect that she has done a decent job in Brighton only to have been let down by some rather questionable Council level management resulting in comments about our armed forces (leading to a Councilor getting sacked) and rubbish piling up in the streets of London.

I really do dread to see what would/could and will most probably happen to my local City if the Labour Party got their hands on the Council and MP position.
I have seen recently first hand the mess that has been made by Labour of Crawley, and expect something much worse to happen in Brighton.


The Huff's post then goes on to make a further moan about UKIP "partly strongly featuring on the programme".
Now considering UKIP were the voice of Out (EU) and other parties (Tories, Lib Dems, Labour and Green's) all represent the voice of In. I don't think it is terribly unacceptable that the Out voice be heard in the lead up to an election that represents the In/Out question and referendum we will likely never get.

The fact UKIP won the European Elections reflects that people are unhappy, and as much as people will argue it was a "protest vote", latest polling figures of people who voted for UKIP in the European Elections shows that a pretty sizable chunk of that vote will follow UKIP to the General Election and beyond.


"Patrick O'Flynn, the director of communications, Diane James and Louise Bours also appeared on the show."

...so did Roger Helmer... Whoops guess the Huff's post forgot him.


"Bours became a social media sensation after going head-to-head with "football's philosopher king" in one of the most surreal political debates in modern history."

...that would be when Mr Barton made a truly sickening sexist comment that only got slammed by Miss Bours and a member of the audience?
Bumblebee was left a stuttering wreck as per usual whilst the other panelists were more concerned about their public profiles.


I personally was glad Miss Bours put Barton in his place. She is not afraid to object to things that should not be allowed. Be it in politics or in the social speaking context.

It's truly a shame that more in politics are not like her.

"A petition calling for Farage to stop being given "disproportionate airtime on Question Time," received more than 2,000 signatures at the time."


Over a thousand people have signed a HM Government petition to Grant UKIP new seats in the House of Lords.
30,092 people signed a HM Government petition for UKIP to be involved in any Television debates in 2015. Wonder if we will see that on the Huffington Post anytime soon?

















But hey if we are going to judge the scope of online Petitions such as the one outlined by this article, which essentially self-judges the amount of airtime UKIP are allowed to get. Granted I am pretty sure the amount of airtime UKIP get goes to a independent body owing to the agreement recently signed about the amount of airtime parties get, let's take a look at some of the other petitions currently out RE: UKIP.

We have a petition on change.org being run by the Liberal Democrats called 'Back Our Campaign To Stop UKIP' which has been signed by 717 supporters.
That's right, a petition run by a democratically elected political party, to stop another democratically elected political party's right to exist?!

Democracy in the United Kingdom has never looked so stupid! Yet they wonder why their support has nosedived with initiatives like that!


We have a Petition proposed by someone to do something about the blatantly misleading impersonation party 'An Independence From UK Now' party, which was rejected. Remember this party is reported to have cost UKIP 2 MEP's in the European Elections and a host of spoiled ballot papers when people have been concerned about voter turnouts.


At the same time as this a petition has been allowed by HM Government petitioning for 'Anti EU political parties like UKIP should be banned running in EU elections' saying that people who get sworn into European Parliament should vow to "solemnly support European Union and will work for the benefit of Union and for it's citizen's interest."

Now correct me if I am wrong but didn't a group of soldiers do that to a certain political leader from 1934 to 1945?

 
"Thousands asked the Executive Editor for the BBC, Hayley Valentine, to "not normalise his vile politics." - says the Huffington Post.

Who the Hell defines "vile politics"? Does this country have such little regard for itself that it denounces a National Election victory of that as being "vile politics"?

By posting this statement, does the Huffington Post denounce anyone ever voting for UKIP as being that of someone pursuing "vile politics"?


"One backer wrote The BBC has "no business giving Mr Farage disproportionate airtime. Balanced coverage is at the heart of the public service broadcasting mission of the BBC." - The Huffington Post goes on to say.

"One backer"?
Farage didn't get "disproportionate airtime"? Prior the European Elections, as highlighted above, other UKIP party representatives were the ones who took to the media to answer media queries.

In fact I would say that in the last 4-6 weeks we have seen very little of Mr Farage, and as highlighted above, other party reps have taken to the stage.


"In good news for fans of Farage's frequent appearances on the BBC, he has today announced he wants to stand in the South Thanet seat in next year's general election - so he should be back on our screens soon."

We also have Suzanne Evans who also announced she would be standing for Shrewsbury & Atcham, Tim Aker Thurrock, Neill Hamilton Boston and Skegness, Patrick O'Flynn Cambridge and others... Yet the Huffington Post is the one focusing on Nigel Farage?

...and then as usual. The article finishes off with "The Highs and Lows of UKIP, mostly focusing on the lows of course!

 
 
 

No comments:

Post a Comment