image Back in my younger more radical days I used to listen to Radio Moscow to an extent that, on reflection, shows I should have got out more. The main presenter of the English language service was Doris Maxina. Each evening she would bring great news about the triumphs of Soviet industry, the passionate desire for peace of the peoples of the USSR and the exciting new Soviet constitution which guaranteed just about every civil and religious liberty a growing boy could want. I can’t hear the BBC’s defence correspondent Caroline Wyatt without being reminded of Doris.

The BBC’s reporting of Afghanistan gives a very convincing impression of having been scripted by the Ministry of Defence. My recollection is that it was not quite so lachrymose when British soldiers used to get killed in the north of Ireland. Now it’s all identikit earnest tributes from senior officers which you can make at home by randomly shuffling the words “loyal”, “strong”, good humoured”, “well liked, resolve”, “sadly missed”, and “professional”. This is accompanied by earnest looks and weird hand gestures from the newsreaders.

It’s probably unfair to single out one journalist for being more sycophantic, uncurious and partisan than any other but Wyatt intrudes on my mornings in a way the others don’t. She was on the radio earlier in the week interviewing Brigadier Tim Radford who commands the imperialist forces occupying Helmand. If Victoria Beckham’s publicist had written the questions for an interview with a celebrity gossip magazine they would have been more penetrating than what Wyatt came up with. So accepting is her interrogation that it’s reproduced in full by the UK Forces Media Ops team, the army unit tasked with propaganda management.

  • The news of more casualties came out yesterday. What does that do to morale amongst British forces here in Afghanistan?

 

  • There have been, though, so many losses. Your brigade knew that it would be a tough tour, it has proved to be a tough tour but it seems that the weapon of choice for the Taliban now is using improvised explosive devices, devices that are hard to find, hard to beat. How can you tackle this threat?

 

  • Counterinsurgency, though, will always be something that’s difficult, something that may take a long time, and above all counterinsurgency is something that demands soldiers to go among the people, to talk to Afghans, to be face to face with them, and so people still do need to be on foot patrol. How can you protect them though under those circumstances or how can they protect themselves, British soldiers, when they’re out there?

How’s that for a no hold barred, let’s get the real picture type of interviewing? She completely accepts the legitimacy of the operation, doesn’t find it odd that these Afghans keep trying to kill British soldiers and defines the mission as counterinsurgency. The mindset is indistinguishable from the British officer corps. This passes for journalism.

By way of contrast Channel 4 has been running a series of reports which feature footage of British soldiers on active service in Afghanistan. Rather unhelpfully it presents the embryonic Afghan army as incompetent and lazy, to the extent that they fall asleep on guard duty while out hunting the Taliban – not something conducive to an old age surrounded by doting grandchildren. The squaddies were in their element swearing loudly at their Afghan companions and blasting the hell out of the local villages.

Which station got closer to the truth?

 

18 responses to “Gung Ho Radio Caroline”

  1. Well, to be fair to Radio Moscow – the presenters didn’t hate working class squaddies and dance on their graves unlike some.

    Like

  2. John – my point, which is obvious enough to anyone who uses the BBC as a source of information about Afghanistan, is that its coverage is a willing adjunct of the military operation. Wyatt’s “interview” is a good specimen of journalism as pro-war propaganda.

    Like

  3. In its coverage of Afganistan in particular the media in general has turned into the propaganda arm of the government.
    I love the mindset of people like John Gray – having a go at the Left but giving a free ride to those really responsible for the pointless deaths of soldiers and thousands of innocent civilians. You’re (ABUSE DELETED – LIAM) cheerleading for imperialism. Sleep well tonight.

    Like

  4. What I find most disturbing is the way that so many people, even those sceptical about the ‘winnability’ of the war or even the validity of being there, nonetheless accept the notion that ‘our boys’ are somehow the good guys in all this. A Roman writer, I think it was Tacitus, once commented that the Empire had been built by fighting purely ‘defensive’ wars. Well quite. The Yanks and their British auxilia are, of course, engaged in the essential task of protecting their people from the ever-present threat of terrorism; geo-political strategic considerations are, I’m sure, the last thing on the minds of the politicians and the generals…..

    Like

  5. What’s abusive about calling someone a hypocrite?

    Like

  6. Censorship Liam? let anon Doug post his stuff – it just shows what a (ABUSE DELETED – LIAM) he and his kind are.

    I suspect he is actually a (ABUSE DELETED) troll.

    Like

  7. It’s a comments policy not censorship.

    If people want to have a row with strangers they are free to pick a fight in the roughest pub near where they live. I’m not going to facilitate name calling on this site. The abuse that passes for discussion in the blogosphere is nearly as depressing as the propaganda that passes for journalism in the mainstream press.

    Like

  8. Hi Liam

    I would agree this with unnecessary swearing etc but “dipstick”? I also suspect that many seemingly far left anons on ultra left wing sites are in fact far right trolls.

    Anyway, its your blog and you can allow what you want to – afterall you’re the Boss!

    Like

  9. splinteredsunrise Avatar
    splinteredsunrise

    I’m just watching Mary Nightingale holding forth on the Megrahi case. She always has this air of an announcer on Ruritanian State TV telling us what the Politburo did today. But then, the blatant editorialising on the ITV news is shocking.

    But that’s a good point about Caroline. I get annoyed by reporters who ask all the wrong questions, but those who don’t bother asking meaningful questions in the first place…

    Like

  10. splinteredsunrise Avatar
    splinteredsunrise

    Talking of Bananastan, I’ve just been watching Mark Austin interviewing General Petraeus on News at 10. Petraeus was lying outrageously, as usual. Austin looked like he was anxious for Petraeus to sell him a bridge.

    Like

  11. I notice that various BBC reporters have transmitted the official line on the election, that there is corruption but it shouldn’t affect the result.

    Like

  12. How about addressing the issue Mr Gray. Do you support British troops being in Afganistan and (until their defeat in Basra) Iraq? If so, how many graves are you dancing on? Do questions like that make me a far right troll? What a strange world planet Gray is.

    Like

  13. Of course Yes and Yes Doug – Planet Gray is a bit strange but at least it is located on Earth.

    Far right trolls do write in a similar style as you.

    Do you people really, really believe the BBC is controlled by the State and follows its line?

    Like

  14. Yes, here on earth, where an unprovoked attack on another country was deemed a war crime at Nuremburg. I’m curious to know why you support both attacks and occupations – humour me.

    I don’t recall anyone saying that the BBC is controlled by the state – certainly not me. The BBC doesn’t need to be controlled by the state. Tthe people who run the BBC broadly share the same view of the world as most senior politicians, civil servants and military – mainly because they come from the same class backgrounds and educational establishments.etc.

    Like

  15. One of the Afghan army officers interviewed on C4 news suggested that his job would be easier were the occupying forces out of the country – and it’s not hard to see his point. The ANA would look more like a legitimate force, independent of foreign powers, and the main bone of contention of the Taliban – the “infidels” – would be gone, allowing the Afghan govt to negotiate a settlement.

    The Nato soldiers interviewed were similarly seemed dismayed at their situation to the Afghan officer – though if anything even less sure of the purpose of their mission.

    I doubt this would have aired on the main BBC news programmes as it would be hard to contextualise as the news reports are shorter than those by ITN on C4.

    Like

  16. The BBC depends on the license fee, which ultimately is given or not given by government decision. The second para of Doug´s statement at 2.42 pm is quite correct.
    As with the bourgeois media generally, it is more subtle and insidious than, say, Pravda, which had two Orders of Lenin on its masthead and explicitly stated it was the organ of the CPSU Central Committee.

    Like

  17. Hi Doug

    So the British government is as bad as the Hitler Nazi and the BBC is a tool of the ruling class?

    It must be really ‘orrible in your world.

    Like

  18. Mr Gray, as you seem set on deliberately misinterpreting what I say, I’ll keep this brief. I didn’t say the British government is ‘as bad as the Hitler Nazi’, as you put it. I pointed out though that the invasion of Iraq was a war crime and Blair should have answered for this at the Haguer.

    The BBC as an institution isn’t a tool of the ruling class but key senior BBC staff – the ones who ultimately call the shots there – are certainly one part of the British ruling class.

    Like

Leave a comment

Trending