BBC admits sending hecklers into Conservative campaign meeting
From Wikinews, the free news source (BETA) that you can write!

April 25, 2005
The BBC is scrambling to explain why its producers equipped hecklers with radio microphones and sent them into a campaign meeting where Conservative leader Michael Howard was speaking.

"For the public service broadcaster purposely to disrupt part of a democratic election effectively to create entertainment shows just how far the standards of the BBC have plummeted," Conservative co-chairman Liam Fox told The Times.

"I do not believe that the BBC should be in the business of creating news," Tory communications head Guy Black told The Times.

The BBC has been unable to point to any Labor meetings that had been disrupted in a similar fashion, despite their claim that the heckling was filmed for a "completely legitimate programme about the history and art of political heckling." At the time of the incident in question, the hecklers did not admit to their affiliation with the BBC, calling themselves "shoppers". However, they were later spotted attending another event with the same crew at Stockton-on-Tees.

Sally Freestone, the UK Special Events assignments editor, was said to be "aghast" at the BBC's behavior, according to Mr. Black's letter of protest to the broadcaster.

Tory officials have demanded that the BBC apologize and promise not to air the controversial footage.

A BBC spokesman told reporters that they would be "investigating the complaint and very thoroughly and will be replying in due course."







Not trying to stir anything up here, just bringing it up as a topic.

Its a non-story. They were making a program about heckling (ie not covering the election) and were heckling various events, including this one. They were going to do the other parties too, out of fairness. Now been turned into a BBC bashing story by various other media outlets.

well they havent done it to any other parties, so.....erm

we didnt need proof that the BBC werent exactly big fans of the conservative anyway. :rolleyes:

they are not big fans of any politicians. You only have to watch the Paxman interviews to see that they are balanced. Do you remember the Hutton Report? And all the hot air from the government about the BBC?

I think the BBC has it about right, 'don't trust any of them'.

I watched the programme last night and the Tories have completely over reacted.

The only reason they went to a Tory meeting was that it was the Tories who were the only ones to have an open air meeting, Labour and the Libs were invited audience only and the programme was at pains to point out that it was to their credit.

It was a very good programme about the decline of our politicians to talk to the people from huge rowdy halls with lots of debate, anger and heckling to a very santised very boring media conference.

Labour and the Libs were criticised and the programme even praised Margaret Thatcher for her ability to speak publicly and deal with the hecklers were as most modern politicians are stuck for words when anyone asks them a questions.

They linked peoples boredom with this election to the fact that politicians are scared stiff at spending anytime talking to the public.

I say well done to the BBC for making it.

the reason why politicians can no longer cope with talking to a group of people that hasn't been pre-audited is because they're afraid of having an opinion of their own - look at how many have gotten "into trouble" for saying something that their party leaders didn't want them to say or didn't toe a particular party policy.

Nowadays your politcal career can be damaged and significantly shortened if you aren't a party automaton and that is surely a disturbing trend that has been building up for a good couple of decades now :/
Surely it would get more people interested in politics if more open air and free to talk and criticise events were created up and down the country with your local and some of the nonlocal political people - people would then feel like they could air their grievances or praise the performance of their mp.

saw that report on how tagging convincts fails, can't see it as a pro Labour stance with the BBC actually.

indeed, its not the bbcs fault they couldnt get their hecklers into a labour meeting because of paranoia about security though in the lib dems defence they have had open air meetings with charles kennedy, the prob has been because of his wife giving birth the schedule has been completely messed up so they are very short notice things right now. anyone remember how john major campaigned on his soap box, people would throw eggs at him and they wouldnt even be arrested as he believed it was part of the democratic discourse that people could pelt politicans with non hard things. i wish politicans would get back to more of that old style canvassing

Well, John Prescott got away with punching a voter who threw eggs at him. I don't know what they are scared of. But honestly could you imagine TB on a soapbox on a high st near you. I can't.

But in the European Elections Robert Kilroy Silk went walkies on Lincoln high street, I am surprised nothing happened to him. If I had been at home something would have.

blair would be murdered. angry people would quickly converge from all over summoned by text message and it would have to stop. kilroy did indeed go walkies in lincoln, from what i understand he had a lot of abuse shouted at him.

Someone should follow him around dressed as an orange. It is Michael Howard that deserved to be heckled, the other two party leaders aren't touring the country with not so subtle racist messages. It quite embarassing for the son of jewish immigrants (whose own grandfather was illegal) that he is running on an agenda of anti-europe and anti-immigration = xenophobic, and anti-gypsy. Who's next gays, the disabled? communists?

I say I want my license fee going to fund hecklers.

I agree that Howard deserves to be heckled but that is not for a publically funded organisation to do.

The day that news organisations try to create the news is the day news becomes worthless.

Didn't the Sun, Star or the Sport get a load of topless blonde women to greet William Hague as his car pulled up for a rally in the last election? Now there's a stunt!

BBC,ITV and newspapers all = SCUM. There all pricks and all ask stupid questions about Iraqi and terrorists. Off subject but Tony Blair in my view doesnt have a clue what he is doing. Laws on alot of subjects are messed up and half of them wouldnt need to be there if he just took a week on sorting the sercuity at airports and ports out.

Another thing is half of his time he's traveling the world sorting out every body elses problems out and also doing to many tv interviews about nothing. A prime minister doing his job is someone who you dont see on tv every 30 mins no hes in his office sorting shit out. Tony Blair isnt a prime minster he may as well be a public speaker.

they are not big fans of any politicians. You only have to watch the Paxman interviews to see that they are balanced. Do you remember the Hutton Report? And all the hot air from the government about the BBC?

I think the BBC has it about right, 'don't trust any of them'.

well that was new Labour. Theres a big difference, atm the BBC isnt too keen on any party, but they sure as hell think the Conservatives are the worst of the lot. Just as Old Labour voters are turning to the Lib Dems, as they are actually more left then Lab at the moment.

Howards own personal views on immigration in my view are NOT racist. And the fact that he himself has owed so much to the generousity of this country. He is a brilliant example of what migrants should be doing, integrating, being passionate about the country and what is offers. I've listened to his speeches and he is a very decent, down to earth man, who has also toned down his previous thacherite politics. It really is a matter that immigration is a good thing in limited doses, just as painkillers will get rid of a headache, but will kill ya if ya shove a whole bottle down your gob. Look at the country, look at the population statstics and compare it to that of other countries, look at the projected population stats etc. It will all fall in to place. I'm far from racist, some of my best mates are immigrants, some of them are third generation immigrats, some first, most of them have integrated, and thats why I'm mates with them ;) Oh, and I fancy a mixed race girl. But Immigration is out of control and needs limitations. The tories aren't planning to ban all migrants, just LIMIT it.

But yes, we all know there are elements in the Tory party that are obviously racist. I'm actually now a member of the conservative party, yet despise of it at the moment, but I'm hoping to get involved a lot more sometime in the future once my exams are over. The party needs a serious kick up the arse.

The classic 'I'm not a racist, my best mates a paki' argument.

The UK has the one of the lowest proportion of ethnic minorities in Europe at 7%, meaning 97% of us are white.

How do you know there are too many? Can you tell looking at someone whether they are an immigrant, economic migrant, asylum seeker or british? I know I can't, which is my point for everyone who claims they think there are too many immigrants, what they really mean is there are too many people with a different colour skin, as they can't tell the difference.

The areas of the country that are close to 100% white are the ones who are most concerned about immigration, the least not surprisingly is London where 1/3 of its population is born overseas. But one of the largest groups of foreign born population is the 200'000 French citizens who live in London. Now they like other immigrants and economic migrants who come from 'white' countries don't seem to be a problem, even though they are stealing our jobs, and pushing up house prices and putting pressure on our public services. No one complains about American merchant bankers, or Aussie barmen?

We need people to fill the 800'000 vacancies in our economy. We have massive shortages of key workers, and what no one ever mentions is we need thousands andf thousands of unskilled workers to pick fruit in Lincolnshire, to clean the offices of London, to work in restaurants, bin men, labourers and so on, all the jobs we don't want to do anymore. The CBI has said that any limit on immigration will adversely affect the economy, so much for the tories being pro-business. We have free movement of goods and capital and in a globalised world people will move as well.

No one mentions the 100'000 brits who leave the country every year. The 500'000 who live in gated communites on the costas who don't speak a word of Spanish, so much for integration.

The whole debate is racist. Just because Michael Howard comes from an immigrant family does not mean he is in someway exempt from being racist, he keeps using his background as some sort of protection. My family comes from Canada, but i can be racist, so what, its a really crap argument.

If you lived in Germany and didn't speak a word of German but lived in an area that was full of brits, you wouldn't 'integrate' either. Think how bad we brits are at learning languages.

The whole debate is racist.

It's great to see there is another tory on here (I was feeling lonely), hello Peyre.

That said I'm very pro immigration, although I would like to see compulsary health checks including TB and HIV checks on all immigrants.

I am an immigrant myself and love this country and know alot of other immigrants who have the same passion for this country.

From a recruitment agency point of few, I've found the people that turn up to interviews, accept the jobs and then actually bother to turn up for work and the ones I trust when they promise me something are immigrant works from Asia - so I say the more the better.

Sorry Zim, you know how I feel about the current debate. It makes me sooooo mad. People hide behind immigration, but deep down they mean foreigners and skin colour, or xenophobia and racism.

I am one of those voters who have now been convinced to definately come out and vote. All the Tories have done is made an awful lot of middle class Labour and Lib Dem voters angry enough to come out and vote, whereas before they would have stayed at home.

If there is an issue in this really boring campaign that has made me furious it's the cynical racist fear-mongering from a party that is so out of touch with its promise of extra detentions and more Mrs Mops that the only thing they have is to whip up this debate. When will they learn the public needs to see a Clause 4, Labour moment to show us they have really changed. But they keep thinking 'if we are just a little more right wing'. They tried the core vote strategy in 2001 with the 3 days to save the pound campaign.

*Steps off his soapbox*

OK im finished now.

Sorry Zim, you know how I feel about the current debate. It makes me sooooo mad. People hide behind immigration, but deep down they mean foreigners and skin colour, or xenophobia and racism.

I am one of those voters who have now been convinced to definately come out and vote. All the Tories have done is made an awful lot of middle class Labour and Lib Dem voters angry enough to come out and vote, whereas before they would have stayed at home.

If there is an issue in this really boring campaign that has made me furious it's the cynical racist fear-mongering from a party that is so out of touch with its promise of extra detentions and more Mrs Mops that the only thing they have is to whip up this debate. When will they learn the public needs to see a Clause 4, Labour moment to show us they have really changed. But they keep thinking 'if we are just a little more right wing'. They tried the core vote strategy in 2001 with the 3 days to save the pound campaign.

*Steps off his soapbox*

OK im finished now.

it's good to get things of your chest pricemazda, so you get stuck in.

I agree the Tory campaign has been poor, I heard Norman Tebbet criticising it this morning and he said one key phrase, which I totally agreed with - you need to offer voters a "vision" of a Conservative UK. ie vote for us and this is the type of country you will get, ie we will build this road, this tram network, these hospitals, these schools, these aircraft carriers etc. Instead Howard has been obsessed with immigration and clean hospitals (although he made a gaff on that front yesterday when he shook patients hands in a hospital with out washing his hands beteen hand shakes).

I will still be voting Tory, but that is just so we can reduce the number of Labour MP and help keep Tony Blair honest.


By the way, pricemazda, is there any chance that Simon Hughes could become the leader of the Liberal Democrats, everytime I hear him, I find myself thinking yes you are right - he comes over as very genuine and someone that I would trust, where as Kennedy just doesn't seem to be hitting the mark. I'm sure Simon Hughes would get more votes, possible even mine.

Simon Hughes is boring, a non-entity. The lib-dems need to move away from the nice nice image and get stuck in. They need to drop the social democrat stuff and be true liberals and really go for the jugular. Charles Kennedy has got them so far with his chat show style but to move to the next level they need to be tougher. You should read the Orange Book, it will show you the future direction of the Lib-dems.

Re: The Tories, like I said they really have no policies apart from really minor things like More detentions and more Cleaners? They want to subside private industry with taking money from state education and healthcare. Who is going to benefit from that, well the people who already are educated privately and treated privately, not those in the NHS of state schools, but the people who go to Eton and Harrow.

They need to move away from this Thatcherite platform, the public needs to see they have changed. The Tories made a huge mistake not going for Portillo. They are still the nasty party and this immigration and gypsy stuff does nothing to change that.

Hopefully we are witnessing the decline of the Conserative Party. You see thats always been Blairs mission for the 21st century to be a progressive one, like the 20th was the conservative one. He wants to make sure that the Tories find it very hard to get elected. I think, maybe he will start to move on PR soon as a way to ensure that.

Simon Hughes is boring, a non-entity. The lib-dems need to move away from the nice nice image and get stuck in. They need to drop the social democrat stuff and be true liberals and really go for the jugular. Charles Kennedy has got them so far with his chat show style but to move to the next level they need to be tougher. You should read the Orange Book, it will show you the future direction of the Lib-dems.

Re: The Tories, like I said they really have no policies apart from really minor things like More detentions and more Cleaners? They want to subside private industry with taking money from state education and healthcare. Who is going to benefit from that, well the people who already are educated privately and treated privately, not those in the NHS of state schools, but the people who go to Eton and Harrow.

They need to move away from this Thatcherite platform, the public needs to see they have changed. The Tories made a huge mistake not going for Portillo. They are still the nasty party and this immigration and gypsy stuff does nothing to change that.

Hopefully we are witnessing the decline of the Conserative Party. You see thats always been Blairs mission for the 21st century to be a progressive one, like the 20th was the conservative one. He wants to make sure that the Tories find it very hard to get elected. I think, maybe he will start to move on PR soon as a way to ensure that.

re Simon Hughes, I disagree, everytime I hear him speak, I find myself agreeing with much of what he says and I trust him, which is rare with a politician, I think he could be a secret weapon for you.

The same goes for Paddy Ashdown, more should be made of him, he has earnt everyone's respect for what he has done for in is it Kosovo.

I will read the Orange book, if I see a copy.

Re the Tories, I said on another thread is that they need a Disraeli type person, someone with charisma, a one nation tory (where there is a place for everyone) - which should rival Tony Blair's big tent approach and someone with a vision for the nation (and on a personal note, some one who is pro tram).

I honestly don't think there is such a person.

although we do have Boris Johnson, who I have to admit could be worth a go - he couldn't do any worse the present shadow cabinet.

With Boris though it seemed like the Tories freaked out about having someone with personality on the frontbench and quickly removed such a dangerous figure.

The Tories even in the supposed new and young 'Notting Hill Set' don;t have any charisma and with old tories bed-blocking I am hoping and praying they slowly waste away into nothingness.

The orange Book is a very liberal book, as in liberal economics, liberal politics, small state stuff. You would find yourself agreeing with most of it. The party leadership weren't keen on people seeing it, as the lib-dems are a split party between right wing and left.

Other possible leaders could be Sir Malcom Rifkind (excude the spelling), he should safely win his seat and could be good - he is someone people would trust.

Ironically, that would give us three party leaders who are Scottish.

Another possible leader could be and this is very much a long shot - David Trimble (who I hear needs the votes of SDLP people to win his Upper Bann constituency in Northern Ireland against the rise of the DUP), so if he loses he could join the Party and I'm sure would gain alot of support within Tory ranks - he is someone who always comes over as quite reasonable.

What are the conservative party's proposals for immigration?

It's quite complicated, if you look on face value what they are saying seems reasonable but its all about the media messages and tone. Its subtle, but when you examine the statements about immigration, they don't really stand up.

The Tories are disingenous, they know they would not be able to withdraw from International Laws governing Assylum - and they purposely confuse assylum and immigration - and nor would they make a realistic attempt, however it sounds tough. The problem isn't so much their actual policy on immigration, but the inflammatory language they use.

Their policies don't stand up either. The quota on refugees? So after the magic number of refugees and someone is fleeing persecution the tory policy is the British government says 'sorry you can't come in we are full up' and send them back to torture in the home country.

They don't say how many immigrants they think are too many, or how many we need.

i know malcom rifkind, i have done so since about 1991. he is one of the most amazing politicans i have ever met. i would trust him completely to be prime minister, he has an incredible intellectual grasp of issues and more importantly is totally principled. he's also extremely charismatic and funny. the problem is he is on the left of the tory party like heseltine and clarke and the tory party members dont like this.

The Hitler Seniors Club that is the Conservative Party haven't worked out that going for someone who tickles their right wing senses will not get them elected.