“Liddle managed to get through a myriad of subjects, being given the chance to discuss his own party political preferences, climate change, the Chilcot Inquiry, the north/south divide and Boris Johnson. Even the Met Office was mentioned”

What? He didn’t mention Sunny Hundal?
He really is a bitch!

No surprise – journalists are even worse than politicians, as they are accountable to no-one. Kate Silverton is fit as f*** though

Seriously, I thought the Indy was going down the swanny so is it possible that this is just a bit of commercial fun & games – get free publicity for the rag and then just promote the deputy editor? It’s what i’d do but then again…

@2 – ain’t no Fiona Bruce though – yowzers and perhaps double yowzers!!

I listened to the whole interview with a mounting sense of anger too. As soon as she even mentioned anything about messages he had posted, Liddle pre-empted the whole thing by going on for 10 mins about accusations no one had even made, the really tame stuff.

What about the Auschwitz joke?? What about getting him to properly explain the attempt to blame everything on Somalis? What about the comment about kicking someone in the cunt, which he accepted on the Guardian site as some terminology he might use. Why didn’t he tell the website owner someone was posting racist messages on his behalf?

Kate Silverton was fawning over him like she was angling for a job. It wasn’t a farce as much as another lame BBC interview like the one they did with the BNP activists and got absolutely hammered for.

We can’t expect the BBC to do a good job any more. I’m wondering if it’s even worth paying my licence fee – I don’t care how noble the principle of the BBC might be, in practice it has been really shit of late and I for one wouldn’t shed a tear if it disappeared up its own arsehole.

I think all we as lefties can really do is simply not buy the Indie if Liddle becomes editor. If only there was a way of damaging the BBC too.

Funny how some things stick in your head. I enjoyed the BBC TV programme presented by Liddle and Silverton, but it was the human rather the political elements that piqued my interest – the same fascinated my wife, too, who is a psychiatric nurse. On one show, they had someone on talking about non-verbal communication, and Liddle — sceptical but perhaps feeling slightly vulnerable – was keen for the expert to “read” his non-verbals. Interestingly, the first thing the expert said was that Liddle was the dominant presenter. Clearly, this was unspoken ground, but Liddle and Silverton both more or less agreed with the expert’s analysis. No need to imagine the non-verbals during this radio interview, is there?

If only there was a way of damaging the BBC too.

Well, the important thing is to continuously highlight and complain about the right-wing bias to reporting, which we keep sweeping under the carpet.

John – the BBC is never gonna win anything. It’s a difficult thing but happens in all public agencies in that when someone hits £60k they suddenly start shitting themselves about not being promoted.

I went to a regional development thingy the other day and not 1 person in the whole room was on anything less than 50 grand and not 1 of them had the balls to say, let’s just elimintate government office for the regions or the regional development agencies. Not 1 – now, is that because they haven’t thought about it? No chance. But why mention it when there’s a gig to be had?

I don’t blame people for looking after their arses but just wish they’d occassionally have a bit of self awareness to accept that other people know exactly why they’re doing it.

“Liddle was understandably keen to play down the whole affair, making reference to the accusation appearing on Guardian blogs which he claimed received ‘an average of about 10 replies’.”

Well that’s bollocks for a start. I made at least 10 comments on the affair myself.

…ok, I’m going away to look for a life now.

John Booth, I’ve just googled Kate Silverton & I must say I don’t share your sentiments at all.

Rather than Liberal Conspiracy, this blog is fast becoming the Liddle Conspiracy weblog.

By the way, has this blog ever accused or gone after a non-white person for being anything less than astutely politically correct? If not, then perhaps your editorial practice betrays a bias of its own.

If not, then perhaps your editorial practice betrays a bias of its own.

Wow, such a smart cookie that we have a political bias. Call the waaambulance for the troll.

Sunny,

“What about the comment about kicking someone in the cunt, which he accepted on the Guardian site as some terminology he might use.”

There’s little point in getting angry that the interview was not conducted as you would have wished. Did you really expect Kate Silverton to say on Radio 5: “So Rod, is it true you said you wanted to kick that woman in the cunt?”.

It’s time to move on and consider where we should invest the proceeds of the 0.1% growth we are so happly to have achieved.

Did you really expect Kate Silverton to say on Radio 5: “So Rod, is it true you said you wanted to kick that woman in the cunt?”.

No, but I thought she might have enquired where she came on the female newsreaders fisting chart.

” think all we as lefties can really do is simply not buy the Indie if Liddle becomes editor. ”

You won’t have to, it is almost certainly going to follow its London sister paper and go free.

Still, it is very, very important that there should be another article about Rod Liddle on this website. I walked past him on Piccadilly last week, by the way. He was smoking a cigarette. Quite racistly, I thought.

Sunny,

“Well, the important thing is to continuously highlight and complain about the right-wing bias to reporting, which we keep sweeping under the carpet.”

It seems you have common ground with many right-wing bloggers, who also see BBC bias as a problem. Can’t help feeling sorry for the corporation myself, as it seems to be considered biased by both sides simply because there is no such thing as truth (a social construct which therefore depends on perception).

And herein lies the problem – Rod Liddle believes he is not racist. Many commentators on here believe he is. The evidence can be span both ways (although my reading is possibly not racist, but stupidly casual and crowd pleasing in a way open to accusations of racism). So there is no truth, but a big argument.

Still, I think one point needs restating. If Rod Liddle wants to be a successful editor (if he is appointed) he will have to consider his audience. I doubt his paper would simply repeat his point of view, as that would not sell (apart from perhaps to Mail readers, who already have a paper). So I suspect his personal view and editorial line might vary. I doubt this will reassure anybody around here, but some acknowledgement that reporters and editors can actually write views other than their own might be ideal.

Watchman,

Congratulations. A sensible post of Sunny’s Liddlewatch.

In writing it you might have allowed Sunny to move onto something else.

It’s time to move on and consider where

Why don’t you start your own blog ‘rumpypumpy’ and write about what you like rather than dictating what we should publish here? Revolutionary idea hey?

Excellent work Sunny. Keep fighting – this man shouldn’t be allowed to edit a bus ticket, never mind a liberal newspaper

Silverton is just your typical BBC newsreader, ticks all the PC boxes. Before she was doing this newsreading I saw her on The Wright Stuff some years back and boy did she talk some crap. She actualy suggested the UK should invade Israel and sort them out. ( just after they took out that terrorist cripple Yasin ).

Rod is the only reason I buy The Sunday Times. No way is he a rascist.

”What about the Auschwitz joke??”

Indeed. Perhaps it would have been a better interview if he explained it like he did in the Jewish Chronicle. (Where he explained it quite well I thought).
http://www.thejc.com/comment/analysis/26305/analysis-a-matter-context

”Blaming everything on Somalis” is something I would like to hear him explain.
That does sound like a more serious case.

As for kicking a woman between the legs: if it was on that football site then I think it’s like how he explains it in the JC article. It’s a place where ”tribal infantilism” takes place – and not everything is to be taken seriously.

He says this –

”Anyone who reads those football fan sites would first be struck by the viciousness of the language. But there are good people there, despite the abuse and often intelligent discussion of important stuff. It’s just that it tends not to be written in the language of a Guardian leader column. Context is everything.”

……. which is (kind of) fair enough in my opinion – but I can see he might not be the best person for the Independent job.

Defending Brendan O’Neill and now Rod Liddle, Damon?

Classy.

“Why don’t you start your own blog ‘rumpypumpy’ and write about what you like rather than dictating what we should publish here?”

Sunny,

I think what you really meant to say was:
“Rumpypumpy, why don’t you bugger off and stop poking fun at my obsessive postings about Rod Liddle? It’s not nice of you to contradict my campaign. Contradiction is not included within the kind of debate I want here”.

Bernard, I’m ‘defending’ Rod Liddle in only a limited way.
In that his Auschwitz comments, while somewhat crude and cavalier, did not carry malice or antisemitism (or what ever is implied by highlighting those comments on this website).

And the line about ”kick her in the cnt” was made on the Millwall website for goodness sake.

Here they are talking about ”Sex in the City” like a bunch of overgrown schoolboys.
http://www.millwall.vitalfootball.co.uk/forum/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=41624&posts=21

Is it misogyny? Well, you could call it that if you really insisted. But it’s pretty harmless really. (And this post – below – is genuinely funny):

”Real wall don’t watch womens tv, they send the wife upstairs to view it on the portable..

See what I mean? You can’t take it at face value. And I think the ”kick her in the ….” line was the same kind of daftness.

The one about female newsreaders is much more dodgy, but I’m not defending ”him” but just highlighting aspects of the ”case” against him.

Maybe one shouldn’t do that Bernard.

As for Brendan O’ Neill and the Spiked people, I read the articles and try to work out if they have merit or not.
I find that some of their stories have it, and others don’t.
What’s wrong with that?

Liddle has become nearly as much of a troll magnet as that Hannan chap.