End of the year...
From new Newsnight editor Peter Rippon:
Dear Viewers,
My Newsnight career is now three weeks old and we are about to disappear for a Christmas break. My arrival has come in the middle of a great run for the programme. We have delivered some record audiences. I have to admit it has little to do with me. The economic crisis has seen audiences to pretty much all BBC News programmes, on all indicators, spiking sharply in a way not seen since September 11th 2001.
If I had to pick one non-economic item we have done it would have to be Jeremy's film with returning British Soldiers earlier this week. The three contributors say they have had a huge response from friends and colleagues. If you have some iPlayer time I would strongly recommend it or you can read more here.
Newsnight Review is looking at the cultural highlights of the year this evening. Let us know yours or you can view the eclectic picks of people ranging from Nicole Kidman to George Osborne here. Personally on TV I would go for Mad Men or maybe Damages. At the cinema it will have to be Kung Fu Panda as it is the only thing I got to see.
Next year on Newsnight there will be more of this and possibly the return of Ethical Man. The website is also getting a revamp and over Christmas the technicians will be making a change to the Newsnight set. See if you can spot what it is...
Peter Rippon
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~55~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Hi Peter,
You might want to get rid of that part of the sofa with no backrest, it looks terribly uncomfortable!
It would be good to have Justin Rowlatt back as well, I liked the ethical man series.
Will also look forward to Newsnight's coverage of the election, if we have it early next year!
Complain about this comment
if ratings is due to external events then why do bbc use it as a measure for programmes?
why is there no other standard of success? Why not a quality indicator?
Sure more people eat at McDonalds than a 3 star restaurant but which is better?
if its a pure numbers games [based on the game theory model of man] then to drum up the numbers you would need to turn newsnight into a tv version of the sun. Bingo, phone ins and lap dance dress code anyone?
Complain about this comment
Welcome Peter, Try and ask Jeremy to say how he really feels, tell him not to hang back and just get in there.......happy new year
Complain about this comment
ethical man. please drop that term. its about freeing people from slavery to multinationals.
ethical man or trying to free oneself from multinationals was always going to be a failure. An individual trying to carve something out of existing uk regulations designed to stop anyone from freeing themselves from multinationals..
rather you would need a collective effort like a town where factory roofs bare used and a council was on board.
if one is interested in cutting edge then go to germany and follow a town there. Their collective model produces results.
the uk model is designed to fail. An individual has no hope.
here in the uk current price per electricity unit is about 34p per unit. Price paid to micro generators [i have only founf one firm that will] is 10p per unit which is a hefty markup. If 20% profit is normal business rate then micro generators should be paid 28p a unit. Which shows how much money there is in it?
There are various hoops one has to jump to be a micro generator that puts the costs so high as to be nothing more than a vanity exercise.
Complain about this comment
Welcome Peter!
And congrats to the fact of your first 3 weeks on the job, as the editor of Newsnight....
Complain about this comment
Hello Peter
I am frustrated by the media world's, Newsnight included, failure to understand the nature of our current crises and failure to question our politicians properly on these issues. Please read this carefully and see if you can incorporate some of these ideas into future programmes:
Not a single politician, not one commentator or presenter and certainly not a single 'expert' in the news has correctly identified the true nature of the two interlinked problems the world is facing today, which currently manifest themselves as a recession:
1. The little financial difficulty.
True, it started with sub-prime mortgages, BUT it is far deeper than that. After all the total of sub-prime mortgage debt is reported as being some $1.5 trillion, whereas world Governments have so far pump close to $10 trillion into the banks. If the problem was sub-prime mortgages, or now 'banks not lending to each other', this $10 trillion cash injection would have solved it in one go.
No, the problem is 'derivatives'. These debts and bets are worth some $500 trillion. Compare that to the GDP of the whole planet of just $50 trillion and you get some idea why this fantastic burden of debt and/or potential liabilities can NEVER be repaid.
The only solutions I can think of are
a) hyperinflation to degrade the whole of that debt (following Zimbabwe)or
b) legal cancellation of all derivative contracts (!!) or
c) collapse of the whole financial system incl just about all banks, and starting all over again.
Discuss
We need to choose one and go for it. The future is bleak whatever Gordon and other governments do, but pumping borrowed money into the economy in the utterly vain hope of recovery is just about the worst possible strategy.
2. The little problem of Energy and Growth.
Next year the world production of crude oil, for the first time in history, is likely to decline for geological, not political or economic, reasons. Peak Gas will follow some 10 years later.
As a result 2008 is the end of the Era of Growth (as growth is predicated on the availability of cheap energy) and the start of the Era of Decline.
No matter what investment is made in oil or gas fields, the total production from 2009 onwards will decline by perhaps 4% on average every year, thus our primary energy sources will halve every 20 years or so.
This ‘peaking’ has already happened in 60 oil producing countries around the world, incl USA (1972) and UK(1999) and now, from 2009, global production will also begin to decline.
The 1930s depression was bad enough, but this decline will be on a massively larger scale. To start with, it will be at least 40 years long. 40 years will take us to about 25% of current energy usage, which is about the level of energy we can expect from all renewable sources combined. So at that stage, provided Governments have been wise enough to have invested massively in renewable energy, renewables may be able to take over from fossil fuels and perhaps stabilise the world economy.
However, pumping trillions of dollars into rescuing banks and car manufacturers and further trillions into ‘restarting the economy’ may impoverish governments to a point where no investment will be possible where it is really needed, such as renewables.
So, what should we do now? I suggest:
a) embrace the Green New Deal (Google it) incl. £50 billion per year invested in renewables in UK. This £50 billion investment will be easily repaid through lower import bills for fossil fuels in the years to come.
b) forget about tax cuts or increases in current spending, they won’t do any good anyway and just add more and more to national (mine and yours) debt
c) choose one of the strategies above for the self inflicted financial crisis - and follow through
d) and go sustainable ( meaning: if you can't continue doing the same thing for say 100 years without damage, then its not sustainable)
Every single 'expert' talks about getting back to Growth. This is utterly misguided.
We need to plan for orderly Decline, otherwise the chaos that will hit us all will cause much suffering and many deaths.
Checkout http://www.transitionnc.org/?q=node/73 and similar website for fuller explanations and some ideas on what to do.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations on the three weeks and all that ... but could somebody explain which cretin decided that there was no news worth discussing (the head of anti-terrorist squad versus the Tories, for instance) on 22 December and so there would be no Newsnight. We all need our Christmas break but many of us will be working up to - and beyond - Christmas Eve. It beggars belief that the BBC's flagship current affairs programme packs it in four days before Christmas. For goodness sake, get the understudies in if the 'stars' can't be bothered. Let's hope nothing important happens before you deign to rejoin us. Yeh, Nollaig Chridheil is Bliadhna Mhath Ur - Merry Christmas & a Happy New Year.
Complain about this comment
7. At 11:15pm on 22 Dec 2008, Seonaidh2
I don't thing Aunty 'does' explanations.
Uniquely funded. Uniquely run.
As I am t'other side of the world I thought my laptop had 'hung' at a point last Friday, but it seems many things are now going weekly if not monthly.
I guess we're seeing the government/quango public service mindset of there being only two choices at 'work': either we pay more or they do less.
As paying more is now going beyond being resisted by those already called upon to work to and over much of Christmas to fund their families and the demands of those who feed off their taxes, then lo... it seems it is services that get cut.
I guess in some organisations that deal in a 24/7, 365/365 industry (such as many news media) the concept of planning for holiday coverage is not so necessary. For a few, what's the worst that can happen... we take our custom elsewhere?
When anyone gets back eventually, all I ask from Xmas from Santa is a little less sparkly 'interpretation of events', and a little more objective, in-depth reporting of news.
ps: If you are doing another 'Ethical Man', while I appreciate all the useful information that was/is/will be shared to help make informed environmental commitments, it would be useful if the options laid out are balanced and have the full enviROI consequences, pro and con, laid out. Try finding a reporter qualified to report and challenge the issues, and able to appreciate the irony of standing on ice floes to which they have flown, to decry the consequences of the rest of 'us' flying.
So.. no more 'analysts', please.
Plus, as purely personal opinion, when it comes to the gimmick, I do rather question the eventual message sent out that whatever a family does commit to can be picked up and then dropped once the show run is over. That rather errs on 'do as we say, and did for a wee while because it ticks a box'. A planet is for life, not just a special segment.
I think the facts, and objective consequences, being laid out will suffice.
And if a Newsnight twofer is still deemed neccessary, might one hope for more moderate (or at least a change from the usual researcher's speed-dial suspects) debaters be invited to discuss any disputed issues?
A Plane Stupid or Greenpeace spokesperson vs. a big oil or airline lobbyist frankly leaves the likes of me stuck in a no man's land as the two extremes trade global warming absolutes at each other.
You can't appreciate the subtle hues of green if they are only presented in black or white. Much like most other topics.
Serve the interests of the public (those who can only afford small hatchbacks rather than Priuses), not market rate pay grades driven by ratings.
Merry Xmas.
Complain about this comment
Sorry, it's me again ... bet you wish your were on the air to do a piece on the Israeli attacks on Hamas. So do I.
Complain about this comment
POSTAGE STAMP SIZE SCREEN. Surely you could at least match minnow Blinkx'x excellent full size screen and high definition?
I watch Blinkx more and more for my news, because your ridiculous screen size is an insult.
Of course it also means I am watching ITN. Do you care?
Come on the BEEB I want to see Martha full size, and put away my magnifying glass !!
If you can't manage it perhaps you should consider handing Newsnight over to them.
Obviously they have your primitive technology licked.
Complain about this comment
Yes but I write a comment, post it, and am told "There has been a problem, no comment was supplied". Not "thank you for your comments".
I then see, by scrolling upwards, my comment awaits moderation.
Then why say, as the screen says right now "No comment was supplied"?
No doubt when I post this, the same charade will repeat.
Complain about this comment
Happy New Year to any in the BBC back from the school hols.
Guess you might have missed it, but guess what, over the last few weeks there's been a war on! How 'sparkly' is that!
Never mind, I've managed to catch up thanks to such as BBC Breakfast News, while all the rest of you are having a well deserved rest.
Thing is, I'm not too sure that those on the Xmas shift are really doing the subject justice. Or the ratings. And I think they know that too, so we're treated to heavyweights in this arena such as Annie Lennox and Alexei Sayle to tell us what to think... though in the case of the latter mainly, and oh-so originally, about President Bush's mental capacities, it seems.
Beyond the motivations behind who is 'selected' to be 'interviewed', the competencies of the kiddies doing the 'interviewing' also really need to be addressed if the BBC do insist on trying to dealing with issues of more heft than skateboarding turtles whilst the more qualified guys are hitting the slopes.
If, on such a serious issue, we are to be treated to the unrestrained opinions of a 'comedian'/activist (and 'singer', though that caption may have been left over from the previous highly relevant contributor) it might have been interesting to discover Mr. Sayle's thoughts on the (less than Hamas supporting) responses from many Middle Eastern political leaders who are a tad closer to the conflict than an Islington soiree.
I was just watching a programme about V2s. As these rained down in and around London, I wonder if the first thought of the population was 'Hmn, I wonder why they are so angry with us?' or 'Let's get a Typhoon squadron over there pronto (to inflict a measured, proportionate BBC mindset-pleasing response. Not)!'.
Equally, if someone was so moved to stand outside his home lobbing bricks through the windows, would his first move be to check their motivations or ask the police to stop them?
I guess we'll never know. At least, not via the national broadcast 'news' service currently in operation.
£3.5B not enough? Maybe Mr. Moore has a point.
Complain about this comment
Last night I had this 'Snowmail' from Ch4:
'We shall be talking live to the Israeli deputy ambassador and also to one of the protest speakers today, the singer-songwriter Annie Lennox. We were rather hoping Ms Lennox would debate live with the Israeli official but, we understand, she’d prefer not to.
Which brings me to a wider point. It’s almost routine in this business for politicians and others to come on the programme, but only on the basis that they will not actually engage with any protagonist from the other point of view. We in the media rarely, if ever, mention that we’ve agreed to it.
It’s only a personal thing, but I reckon if people come on the programme only on the basis that they will not debate live with the other side, I think you, the viewers should know. I think we should tell you. Instead of which we rather cover up for people who want to come out and make their point but won’t take on the other side.
Our programme editor tonight says he felt happy having both Ms Lennox and the ambassador even if they are not engaging with each other because I’ll be able to challenge both. But is he right?
It doesn't seem to go much into the actual qualifications of Ms. Lennox to debate anything of this nature with much authority, and hence the prominence her views seem to be given, but there seems to be some journalistic unease and/or integrity at work. I wonder if this unwillingness to defend statements was made clear when broadcast or left with a minority read email?
I don't seem to recall any such thing associated with all her 'outings' elsewhere.
Certainly a snippet this viewer would appreciate knowing in future, FYI.
As to a programme editor's 'happiness', well, D'uh. An ambassador vs. a pop star... ratings heaven. Who cares about serving the actual issues, or the public, sensibly (well, looking at the intro, quite a few whose salaries depend on targets more than doing a good job, apparently)?
Love the notion that some of our news media 'stars' will be able to 'challenge' equally, and effectively, on an individual basis. Mind you, well moderated live debate is also long gone. You either get the moderator's personal views mixed in on one side or other, or they are so poorly informed that outright lies can be be spouted with impunity.
Shame.
Complain about this comment
I'm currently considering whether the BBC is biased against the state of Israel or not.
Roughly my reflection so far is that it doesn't necessarily mean to be, conforming to some corporate liberal comfort zone as it has in general been accused of, but that the nature of the images that television display of death and destruction means that viewers are naturally disposed to think badly of a state that launches such attacks as the on-going ones on Gaza and that the BBC is insufficiently sensitive in addressing the problem to ensure that a balanced impression is conveyed.
One thought occurs. I knew that Hamas had stepped up its rocket attacks against Israel lately but had assumed these were ineffective. In fact it seems that they have terrorised entire communities even if they didn't often secure fatalities and this I didn't know.
Did Newsnight ever run a piece prior to the current Israeli retaliations in Gaza on the 'human costs' of these attacks? Has it ever been discussed editorially that it ought to run such a piece?
I should be grateful for a reply.
Complain about this comment
14. At 08:39am on 05 Jan 2009, rinpoche1
I should be grateful for a reply.
I wouldn't hold your breath, though some must be heading back to the grindstone soon from school hols.
Not that means an actual reply will be any more likely here, mind.
The BBC news blogs have been, and mostly still do echo to the sound of tumbleweed. Certainly News(some)night's collection would need a Tardis to verify. Darn, I think I have suggested the first major 'story' of the year requiring their attention.
May be no bad thing. I have been getting a fair bit of actual news reporting from elsewhere these last few weeks, and it can be quite refreshing without 'events' being 'interpreted' by 'analysts' and 'guests'. Maybe Mr. Ross on the right kind of shoe to throw to really make a statement?
Ironic really. Some organisations I'd see value in rewarding by opting to pay for their efforts, but they are already free by virtue of funding based on their popularity.
Complain about this comment
Thanks JunkMale [15]
Using the Google search engine on the terms 'BBC Newsnight Hamas' I found no reference to any reportage of the Hamas rocket attacks.
Of course that doesn't necessarily mean there weren't any but it does it make it likely (as I suspect is so) that there weren't any.
So either 1 reported accounts of Israeli communities terrorised by these attacks are Israeli propagands or 2 they weren't noticed or thought important by the Newsnight editorial team.
Which?
But I did discover that some Palestinians think the BBC is biased *towards* Israel. here's the link: http://www.arabmediawatch.com/amw/Articles/ActionAlerts/tabid/74/newsid397/40/COMPLAIN-TO-BBC-RE-NEWSNIGHT-WITH-AFIF-SAFIEH/Default.aspx
Poor old Newsnight!
Complain about this comment
Thanks JunkMale [15]
Using the Google search engine on the terms 'BBC Newsnight Hamas' I found no reference to any reportage of the Hamas rocket attacks.
Of course that doesn't necessarily mean there weren't any but it does it make it likely (as I suspect is so) that there weren't any.
So either 1 reported accounts of Israeli communities terrorised by these attacks are Israeli propagands or 2 they weren't noticed or thought important by the Newsnight editorial team.
Which?
But I did discover that some Palestinians think the BBC is biased towards Israel. here's the link: http://www.arabmediawatch.com/amw/Articles/ActionAlerts/tabid/74/newsid397/40/COMPLAIN-TO-BBC-RE-NEWSNIGHT-WITH-AFIF-SAFIEH/Default.aspx
Poor old Newsnight!
Complain about this comment
Whoops sorry - some hitch with HTML responsible for the double post.
Complain about this comment
Well nothing the slightest bit biased about tonight's (Jan 5th) coverage of the conflict, as even-handed as you could wish, and since Newsnight is pretty well the only TV I ever watch that's my duty done as a concerned citizen and admirer (sort of) of St. Mel of The Mail: if I ever happen to notice anything anti-semitic or islamophobic in Wallace and Gromit I'll email someone - promise.
Happy New Year to the Newsnight team which I forgot to wish you.
Complain about this comment
ps: the importance of being Peter...
You may want to have a small word in the shell likes of the IT bods about this bit... top right...
This is the Newsnight editor's blog, where editor Peter Barron, and some of his colleagues, will discuss issues affecting the programme.
Refreshingly unegotistical priorities, but it may be worth all who venture through knowing who they are dealing with now... you know, for the sake of factual accuracy.
Mind you, if you want to comment on the Andrew Marr Show the only option is still 'Breakfast with Frost'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/newsid_3960000/newsid_3961500/3961515.stm
Those budget cuts must be biting... or the hols getting longer and longer...
Complain about this comment
I know answering is not mandated (though often appreciated), but I often wonder if anyone in the BBC actually reads their own blogs.
Life's a journey. Why spoil it by worrying about what those bumps on the way may have been?
Complain about this comment
20. At 5:25pm on 06 Jan 2009, JunkkMale
Just to show courtesy is not totally dead... you're welcome.
Nice to know that someone, somewhere, might at least be reading every so often, at least.
Complain about this comment
Mind you, it's still 'Breakfast with Frost'.
How long has it been since that ended?
Doesn't do to rush these things, I guess.
So long as Andrew Marr doesn't mind, why should we?
Complain about this comment
THE MATTER IS THAT CERTAINLY IN FRONT OF A TOUGH TIMES EVERYBODY HAVE TO MAKE CUTS ON THE SPENDING. WE MAKE CUTS ON RESTAURANTS,CINEMAS,ON BURNING GAS ON THE ROAD, AND ON SUPERMARKETS PRINCIPALLY BUT ON SHOPPING TOO. THE PROBBLEM IS THAT WITH THE CUTS WE HARM THE COMMERCE INEVITABLY. IT IS A VICIOUS CIRCLE. I THINK THE ECONOMISTS HAVE A GROSS WORK IN THE DESK TO SOLVE ALL THIS MESS IN THE MEASURE OF THE POSSIBILTIES.
Complain about this comment
Suggestions on ways to save money:
Millions are being wasted on subsidising Private & so called"Job Placement"organisations such as Pertemps.
These organisations were created to play the key role in "Labours" futile attempt at disguising the appalling high figures in unemployment. Furthermore, these "Private" organisations are self serving whilst offering the "tax payer" a "night nurse" illusion that seems to suggest that all is being done to place the long term unemployed into sustainable Employment and/or skills training.
But unbeknown to the "tax payer" & the hapless claimant, training in new skills, are programmes that are often nonexistent and the sustainable jobs, are actually casual contracts that are often terminated as soon 13 weeks are completed by the signed off claimant. 13weeks is usually the minimum time served as an employee before the company is required to offer a full time contract that includes provisions for sick pay as well as holiday pay
This is convenient for all three parties. The D.W.P can boast that more people are signing off; the Private Organisation gets a bonus from the “Tax Payer” when the former claimant has been employed for a minimum of thirteen weeks, and the casual contract employer can thereafter OFFLOAD the employee back onto the job centre after thirteen weeks and go back to Pertemps/other Private Organisation and take on a new claimant without having to pay Agency Rates for the staff took on. Its a win-win situation for all concerned bar the hapless claimant, who was tricked into believing that they should take up the offered opportunity to work in a warehouse on a "permanent basis", only to then find themselves on a 13 week Casual Contract carousel that spins them right back to the job centre!
All this is going on at the same time the Chancellor announces that 1.7 Billion has been set aside to help train the long term unemployed, in skills that will lead to sustainable employment! A great proportion of this money is at the sole disposal of these Private Organisation, who will claim that it will be used to employ staff who will lead the long term unemployed into skills training and sustainable employment.
Invest the money directly into Job Centres and let’s have clear accountability for how this money is being spent.
AR
Birmingham
Complain about this comment
There have been thousands of column inches in the press, hours and hours of discussion throughout the media about M.P.s becoming more and more imaginative in finding ingenious methods of working the system, many of them with unbelievable chutzpah.
This could be just one way to work the system.
Patsy Calton was diagnosed as having "some form of cancer"
in February 2005 as reported in the [Manchester evening news Wednesday 11 May 2005]
Another member of Parliament stood in, as health spokes person in February. 2005 [ROMSEYREDHEAD BLOG 10;27 pm FEB' 22nd 2005 ]
During the Election campaign, she was under doctors orders not go out for fear of infection. [Stockport Express Peter Devine 11/5/2005 In a statement regarding her state of health, there was nothing definitive the article regarding her health. She said that she has lived and worked with cancer in the past, I live and work with it now and nothing changes. [Stockport Express page 7. 13th April 2005 ]
A councillor colleague, had to appear on screen for Patsy Calton on the BBC's Sunday politics show on April 17th. [Stockport Express 20th April 2005] [And the BBC] Just four days after being adopted as candidate. Patsy Calton was too ill to hit the campaign trail or attend the count, because of illness. [Brian lashley Manchester Evening News] 6/5/005
Officials were keen to assure the electorate she will be fit enough to represent the constituency. [ Brian Lashley, Manchester evening news 6/5/2005.]
Under the heading, "The victorious MP for Cheadle, Patsy Calton has been speaking for the first time about her election victory and her latest battle with life threatening cancer of the spine.[Stockport Express 11/5 / 2005]
She recieved a letter of encouragement during the election.Headed, "A tonic for Patsy" (but not any of the contents of the letter), published in [ Manchester evening news on Wednesday 11 May 2005] After the election. Patsy Calton, in a piece in the local paper, said "thank you for having faith in me for another four or five years. But what not all the voters know, is that for the past six months I have been fighting a second battle with cancer. [Stockport Express front page 11/5/2005]
A picture seen in the Express on the 12th may, was described as Patsy on a tour of Cheadle high street with a political colleague, but after a personal visit by me, was in actual fact taken on Stockport road Cheadle Heath about a mile away from the busy part of Cheadle. [See Google Earth]
She said she would be taking the oath on Monday 16th May, but didn't make it.(Not recorded in the press.) She went on 24th May by ambulance accompanied by specialist cancer nurse, and special arrangements had already been made to enable her to take the oath. [Stockport Express 25th May 2005]
The speaker of the house, stepped down from his chair of office to "welcome her home" to Parliament and kiss her on the cheek.
[Stockport Express 25th May 2005]
An M.P.in her blog " ROMSEYREDHED" at 8;50pm 24th May 2005. said "We were all paged to be told that Patsy Calton was swearing in at 3:30 pm"
COURAGEOUS Cheadle M.P.Patsy Calton, who has cancer has been reappointed as party health spokeswoman. [ Manchester evening news 27th May 2005] ( She died two days later)
On there return from the swearing, it was reportedin the Stockport Express. Patsy had been determined to visit Parliament to be sworn in as M.P. last week despite the dreadful toll it might have on her health." Then went on to say."She used a lot of energy in making that trip last Tuesday by ambulance. But it was good that she did because she saw her friends for the last time in the Chamber which was something she was determined to do." [Stockport Express Peter Devine 1st June 2005]
Martin Wainwright in the Guardian, wrote," she fought the election whilst in the final stages of cancer.[The Guardian Monday 30th May 2005]
Micheal White also in the Guardian, wrote on the 31st of May "up until 10 days ago, [21st May] she hoped she might live longer" [ Guardian 31st May 2005]
Micheal White also wrote in his column on the same day,
"By this time" (as she was wheeled into the chamber to take the oath) "she knew she was dying" [Guardian 31st May 2005]
One eulogy to Patsy Calton, said that "she had been fighting insuperable odds". [Stockport Express 22nd June 2005]
The death in service gratuity (not a pension) is calculated at four times annual yearly salary. In 2005 about £235,000 tax free. As published in the [The green book under member's Pensions Section 2. page 7]
Make what you will of these near verbatim reports in various news paper articles and government publications, and draw your own conclusions.
Complain about this comment
Everyone world-wide needs to know what George Bush and Dick Cheney and many democrats don't want you to know.
I am a Democrat.
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Lots of information and links to check out.
I am the Good Guy.
[Personal details removed by Moderator]
Complain about this comment
The newsnight budget. It seems that the content of this show (that I once respected) is full of fluff pieces and partisan wrangling. There is no indepth investigative journalism, just talking points and dumbed down examples with a lack of impartial references (apart from the occasional interrogation by Jeremy Paxman when a minister is blatantly lying or omitting facts)
In the week that the climate camp is happening (undoubtedly highlighting the greatest threat to humanity), there have been no focus on the injustices they are trying to highlight only the policing issue for a couple of minutes. At the same time whole shows have been given over to party political point-scoring on education, Lockerbie and even land grabs in Ukraine (although I'm sure there was corporate story in there somewhere).
Our politicians work for us, not the corporations. Lobbying etc should be exposed for the sham it is, not tidied away for the corporations wrecking our country. See also Keith Olberman/Rachel Maddow show for pointers. You definitely need them.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS