It has been remarked elsewhere, but it is an interesting phenomenon of BBC reporting.
The BBC reported Boris Johnson as having won by a "tight margin" in London.
By comparison, they reported that Francois Hollande had a "clear victory".
Boris beat Kenny Fink-Livingstone by 51.5% to 48.5% - a margin of 3%.
M Hollande beat M Sarkozy by 51.7% to 48.3% - a margin of 3.6%.
So 3% is "tight", while 3.6% is "clear".
Presumably BBC guidelines are that 3.3% would be a "respectable" or "average" margin? If so, that's a fairly narrow range from "tight" through "normal" to "clear". Or is it that Socialist margins are more emphatic than Conservative ones? I feel we should be told.
I have a theory that the BBC consists of a remarkable number of Journalists, Editors, Producers etc, who are Guardian Readers. Most are also card carrying members of the Afluent, Social Climber Association ASCA.
ReplyDeleteAs members of ASCA they are required to take an supposedly impartial view of Right Wing extremists such as Boris Johnson and David Cameron. The do this by inflected speech, by using words that allow political correctness to seep from their pores, while bile seethes underneath.
If this were an Enid Blyton story, we would be reading between the lines for the words written in Lemon Juice, holding the page to a flame to allow the secret words to be discerned.
I have no problem with a Public Service Broadcaster employing left-leaning plutocrats, but I object to them hiding their true lights under a forest of devious words and meanings.
In the interests of fairness and transparency, shouldn't all public service broadcasters, be required to declare their interests and political affiliations, just as Members of Parliament and Local Government do, to avoid a conflict of interest.
Sadly, I think that if we did so, we'd have to change the definition of the BBC to the Boring Broadcasting Corporation.
Perhaps part of the difference is that the London result took 26 hours to be announced but the French one only about half an hour. Psychologically, if not psephologically, a long process seems to imply a close result, whereas a quick victory is a clear one. Of course the real reason seems to be that the French do these things far more efficiently than we do. And it might help that they did it in two rounds to stop the also-rans delaying the final tally.
ReplyDeleteWhat utter nonsense. The Political Editor of BBC News is Nick Robinson who was President of Oxford University Conservative Association. The Chairman of the BBC Trust is former Conservative MP Chris Patten.
ReplyDeleteIf the BBC is biased in its political coverage but it's hardly likely to be leftwards.
Peter, you may be right.
ReplyDeleteI believe it may have something to do with the fact that we drive on the left and the French drive on the right.
ReplyDeleteIconoclast
Anonymous, are you the same as the last Anonymous or another Anonymous?
ReplyDeleteAlso, is "Iconoclast" a pseudo-pseudonymn, or a gratuitous insult?
Archdruid Eileen,
ReplyDelete1. Not the same as the last Anonymous. Haven't a clue who they are.
2. Iconoclast is a pseudo-pseudonymn not an insult. I am fairly harmless.
I comment on Peter Kirk's blog on occasion which is how I found yours which I have to say, is highly entertaining.
May the 4th (3 days ago) be with you.
Keep up the good work.
Iconoclast
PS I expected to find some reference on this blog to the perigee Moon. Don't Archdruids know about these things?
I did indeed comment on the perigee Moon. But I used the term "Supermoon" because it sounds so much more exciting. And I can't spell "syzygy" without looking it up. Which you've just made me do.
DeleteAh yes - I missed this. You do know your stuff.
ReplyDeleteThis 'syzgy' sounds like something undesirable you may have just sat on.
Could this be anything to do with the 'Saros cycle' the Beaker folk's main form of transport?