Ritchie not on Newsnight

Newsnight bunnygirl: BBC news show snubs male economist of 54 but picks fashion blogger, 25, for debate about tax

Richard Murphy claims he has been discriminated against by BBC\’s Newsnight
He was \’snubbed\’ for the show\’s debate on corporate tax over a younger female colleague
Poppy Dinsey, 25, says she was chosen to tick the \’young, female\’ box

Tee hee.

Of course, Murph\’s not an economist (and, for the avoidance of any doubt, nor am I).

Although what would be interesting would be to have the both of us on the same show……

28 thoughts on “Ritchie not on Newsnight”

  1. He is right up to a point. The choice of people is designed to make the BBC look good but not provide a good debate.

    With this ‘story’ gaining traction, (the Telegraph has a Guardian style UKUncut article today), the beeb will I’m sure contribute to the confusion and ensure that multinationals begin to doubt the rules under which they can operate in the UK.

    Looks like you are heading for taxation by prejudice.

  2. So Much for Subtlety

    I know I shouldn’t say it, but I admit I saw the pictures: She has a minimum of two excellent points. Which is roughly two more than Ritchie does.

    I’d rather my taxes put a leperous armadillo on the BBC than Ritchie’s nonsense.

  3. bilbaoboy,

    He is right up to a point. The choice of people is designed to make the BBC look good but not provide a good debate.

    In which case, what is Richie doing there?

    Look at his whole attitude to fact checking on his blog. He doesn’t say “oops, I cocked up there” or engage in commentators. He just bans people. To hear him now complaining that he’s shut out is a bit rich.

    I’m also pretty sure that he’s a supporter of the BBC because he’s often a favourite specialist (ahem) on there. And this is ultimately where political organisations that require balance end up – you bring some people in that tick the right boxes because it’s easier than having to answer inevitable questions about why you didn’t. The only answer to this is shutting down the BBC.

  4. The Stigler @ 5

    Mr. Murphy, when he has been there, is there to pander to the woolly ones; what the Beeb does best…. Must check their charter sometime!

    Either he didn’t fit the pattern (gender balance being, of course, the most important thing) this time or they’ve rumbled him (which I don’t believe ‘cos they love him).

    Their correct panel make-up doesn’t coincide with mine. They don’t believe in balance. Love to see him on with Tim (Tim, no wine the night before please)

    And I would love to hear a psychiatrist’s opinion of Mr. Murphy’s mind. I diagnose (I am as much a psychiatrist as he is an economist) narcissism, border-line personality disorder and an exagerrated self-esteem without any apparent basis in reality.

    He fits facts to his theories. His thought processes are simple. He lacks knowledge of his ‘field’ and applies worst case scenario to people’s motives (that’s the border-line bit). Despite his being everywhere, he is intellectually terribly lazy and used to (I no longer check if he still does it) used to preface his thoughts with ‘ I haven’t thought this through…

    Perfect for the Beeb.

  5. bilbaoboy,

    And I would love to hear a psychiatrist’s opinion of Mr. Murphy’s mind. I diagnose (I am as much a psychiatrist as he is an economist) narcissism, border-line personality disorder and an exagerrated self-esteem without any apparent basis in reality.

    It’s hard to tell. However, he does get paid by various groups, so a simpler explanation is that he can’t deviate from the script without losing money. Although it’s possibly the other way around, that this is what he believes and then sought income that suits it (although he doesn’t seem very open to his beliefs being challenged).

  6. My view of Murphy’s been on record for a long time. The Murphy Show’s a gig. He’s cottoned on to there’s a market for Murphybollocks & he’s supplying it. Not the only one either. La Toynbee’s been doing it for years.

  7. Murph has played a strange hand on the public relations front.

    Here’s how it works:

    Journalists keep a little black book. On every known topic they are involved in (tax, dog training, curing cancer, whatever), they have a couple of ‘go to’ people who they first talk to if the relevant issue arises. And if there are 2 sides to the argument, they will have names for each side. A ‘go to’ person only needs to have 3 quallities:

    They are generally make good copy (got something interesting to say, maybe a bit controversial, perhaps photogenic), and are reliable.

    They know more about the subject than the journalist (whether they know more than other experts in the field is irrelevant).

    And most importantly, out of sheer luck, they’re in the book.

    Murph occupies that position for a number of journalists, particularly to offer the left wing slant. So far, Murph has played a blinder.

    The thing he hasn’t counted on (and will come as a shock to his giant ego, and may be happening already) as that as sure as night follows day, the media WILL get bored of him. Nothing personal or anything, but they eventually do find someone else.

    Strangely, the Murph is the right’s dream ticket. The type of person I would fear would be someone with his authoritarian views but with the charisma and maybe good looks that he distinctly lacks. Imagine a hard-left Nigella.

    Where he has stuffed up the timing: Taxing big companies has recently been as big an issue in the mind of the public as we have known for a while. However, the coalition is halfway through its term, unlikely now to collapse before 2015. The taxation of big companies is just to dull, complex and distant to keep the public interest.

    Unless there is some unforeseen event, I can’t see the public still being too interested in 2015.

    And like it or not, Murph (with his smug ways) is the poster child for everything in this world that is dull, complex and distant. Another middle aged fart who has made a pile from keeping the system complex, and wants to make it more complex.

    By 2015 he will be last week’s fish and chip wrapper.

  8. Adrian (#13)

    Absolutely agree – according to some media contacts, Murphy’s apparent knowledge (or ability to come across as compelling for the uninformed) isn’t the issue. What is problematic is that he is allegedly as truculent in person as he is online, and every BBC appearance is followed by a complaint about ‘bias’ or ‘not being given enough airtime’ thus they probably thought Ellie O’Hagan would be, frankly, more pleasant to have on the show.

    I hope you are right about him being irrelevant in 2015 – I agree he has displayed a staggering lack of political awareness, especially as his privileged position as ‘Chief Economic advisor’ to the TYC had put him in prime position to accept a post as Ed Miliband’s Chief Economic Advisor – Miliband being effectively a TUC marionette. That has been torpedoed, as he comes out of this looking like a petulant teenager.

  9. Ellie’s almost a big a dick as Richie:

    “I put this to Richard Murphy: do you ever worry about getting raped on your way home? Do men stop you in the street to make lewd comments to you? Are you patronised and belittled as weak and incapable despite the words coming out of your mouth? Do you receive nasty personal abuse, not for the opinions you have, but for having any opinions at all?… I doubt you do. I do – for the simple reason that I am a woman. The conditions I’ve just described are the daily circumstances of my life”

    Every day? That’s a strange life you lead.

  10. So Much For Subtlety

    Trig – “Every day? That’s a strange life you lead.”

    Naaah, she just needs a better class of boyfriend.

    Still, as far as speaking bollocks goes, she is definitely in Ritchie’s territory. It seems they have a complete twat quota and they replaced Ritchie with a fellow spirit.

    I applaud Newsnight’s decision to prioritise a gender-balanced panel. When the producers favoured a capable young woman over a capable man, they weren’t being sexist. They were acknowledging that women make up only 22% of the figures in public life – an institutionally sexist fact that they were trying to correct. It is the responsibility of people on the left to push for greater representation of women in public life (as well as people of colour and LGBTQ people) – it’s not some luxury issue we can put on the backburner while fighting the excesses of capitalism. If your politics exclude half the population, they are worth nothing.

    Yes, honey, when they appoint a woman instead of a man, they are being sexist. It does not follow that if only 22% of people in public life are women sexism is to blame. It may be that among the best and brightest, 78% are male. Which is, I would think, something that is in accord with most people’s experience even if we are not supposed to think it or say it. It is simply not true that a gender-blind policy excludes half the population. What interest do women have in hearing other women spout nonsense as opposed to hearing an intelligent conversation regardless of the gender of the people involved? It is asinine. And a good explanation of why they did not replace a competent male with a compentent female. They replaced one set of baloney with another. Just with a nicer pair. No more.

    And this:

    They didn’t just pull my name out of a hat and then shove me on air because I happen to have a vagina. I had to actually be GOOD at it as well.

    How do you get to be good at having a vagina? Can you take classes?

  11. Adam

    A really ‘Heterosexist ‘ remark – What will happen when they run out of letters I wonder? The odd thing is that there is zero (absolute zero) private demand for this kind of crap -without public money it wouldn’t exist- this is where the cuts should be falling, on the entire anti- discrimination apparatus. As for O’Hagan, rumour has it she was the University bike in her time so in answer to the excellent SMFS (# 18) , ‘practice makes perfect’!

    Nothing from Arnald thus far?

  12. What’s the difference between “queer” and “lesbian or gay”? And, please, do I really have to care?

    It’s their life, let them get on with it. How about if I promise to continue not giving much of a shit about other people’s private lives if they promise not to demand I worship at the foot of their ever increasing alphabet soup.

  13. Sniggers …

    From the link Frances so kindly provided:

    is the idea that a white, middle-class man can seriously be the victim of institutionalised.

    Seriously. Not my edit or mis-paste. That is her full stop, end of sentence. Err, yes, he can. Unfortunately he isn’t, as far as I can see, the victim of institutionalist “fact correctness”, “idiot-o-phobia” or paymaster-sniffing-monofocus. In fact, Ritchie gets a completely free ride – except in places like this.

  14. What’s the difference between “queer” and “lesbian or gay”?

    Queer is a more encompassing term that covers people who aren’t permanently wedded to their spot on the Kinsey scale. It also covers alternative sexualities that don’t fit into the straight/gay spectrum.

    And, please, do I really have to care?

    Of course not. All you have to do is not use ignorance as a way to belittle people or as an excuse to take away their rights. In other words, Surreptitious Evil, keep doing what you’ve been doing. You may be interested to know you have your own letter – LBGTQA, where A is for “ally”.

  15. Queer is a more encompassing term that covers people who aren’t permanently wedded to their spot on the Kinsey scale.

    Okay. So why should they be lumped together under “lesbian” more than “heterosexual”?

  16. Are we supposed to take the bollox & #14 seriously or is this some sort of coded humour that’s going straight over my head?

  17. b i s
    I’m afraid we are meant to take it seriously, very much so, there’s nothing the self obsessed need more than to enroll others as walk ons in their theatre of the absurd.

  18. Trig,

    Whatever Ellie Mae may be, she isn’t a dick. Has different equipment – as she explained in her first paragraph.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *