Putting two and two together
It seems a number of people are getting hot under the collar about the fact that, as they are fielding the requisite number of candidates, the BNP qualify for their own election broadcast.
Now it seems to me the BBC and the other networks could circumvent this anxiety with some clever scheduling:
“…that was an election broadcast on behalf of the British National Party. And now on BBC1, Schindler’s List.”
Problem solved.
PS. If you’re a member of the BNP and I’ve offended you, have a present by way of recompense.
Posted on April 21st, 2005 at 3:53 pm
| See also • Is that good or bad? • Elect Respect UPDATED • Strange correspondence |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
• Filed under 2005 General Election, UK politics |
• |
Over on the BNP sites, they’re getting very het up about BBC and C4 censorship. Apparently both demanded certain ‘changes’ to the final broadcast, and the BNP have threatened to sue if any other party shows a PP with the same ‘problems’. Oh joy.
I’ve read that the problem with the BNP film was not what it said, but the fact that it had a number of technical faults due to it being unprofessionally produced.
Overall, it was not a particularly effective broadcast. Not enough real words (because it probably wouldn’t be allowed) - just implication of their racist ways. You could see the message that they were trying to push, but it sort of vanished in a haze when the lyrics referred to the ex-serviceman as drinking White Lightning when in fact he was clutching a litre bottle of Teachers.
It was a weird broadcast. The BNP sympathisers I’ve met would have all the homeless put in a gas oven along with the gypsies, regardless of what job they used to do.
And perhaps after the next New Labour party political broadcast, the BBC could bring our attention to a showing of “Truth, Lies and Videotape”?
“…that was an election broadcast on behalf of the Conservative Party. And now on Channel 4, Shameless.”
Endless fun.
Things which struck me:
(1) Are they really so hard up for people to appear in their broadcasts that they have to bribe homeless people with alcohol?
(2) Did the Admiralty and MOD give permission for their war memorials to be used in a Party Election Broadcast?
(3) Rotten though this sounds, they didn’t exactly explore *why* the man in the broadcast was homeless. I suspect it wasn’t because he was turfed out of his six-bedroom townhouse in Henley-on-Arden so a pregnant fifteen-year-old illegal immigrant with TB could bring her entire family over, but might in fact be connected with his being a violent alcoholic…
“Schindlers List!” Haw haw! Neat idea.
I still can’t get over the humiliation of actually having a BNP councillor in my own ward. Even as i type! Makes me want to scrape my tongue. The shame!
S.
PS: THought i’d better leave my comment down here, as no doubt all yer later posts will fill up with Guardian readers, now that you’ve appeared on this saturdays p.6
PS: But i am grateful to the G. for pointing yer out. Really enjoyed my visit, and left grinning hugely.
I should think everyone already reads the Guardian.
“That was an election broadcast on behalf of the Liberal Democratic Party and now on BBC 1, “Clueless”"
Indeed, endless fun.
Joe said…”(2) Did the Admiralty and MOD give permission for their war memorials to be used in a Party Election Broadcast?”
Just a small point but they are war memorials are not the property of those two organisations they infact belong the nation….however whether or not their use by the BNP is a worthy show of respect to our war dead is another question…