Cheap Vimax Pills Uk Buy Generic Zyrtec D Online Order Cialis Net Buy Viagra Generic Online Buy Genuine Proscar Uk

Nick Robinson attacks anti-war placard


2:17 pm - October 21st 2010

by Sunny Hundal    


      Share on Tumblr

via Mehdi Hasan.

Imagine if that was some right-wing placard (‘stop immigration!’) – the Daily Mail would go postal about his supposed left-wing bias.

Quite funny watching Robinson get so annoyed though. This happened yesterday.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: News

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


Hmm, the headline is a bit OTT, isn’t it.

He doesn’t really attack the placard

And he’s basically within his rights to get rid of something that is interfering with him filming the segment.

Not to say I like Nick Robinson, or support the on-going Afghan bloodbath, but I don’t think we want to be getting all Glenn Beck in our misconstruals here…

So that’s three out of the last four sidebar stories with fundamentally misleading headlines. Cracking stuff.

errr he grabbed the placard, threw it on the ground, and stamped on it repeatedly. if that’s not “attacking” then what is?? he could’ve just asked the protesters to move out of shot, or more likely moved himself. or actually engaged them in debate/conversation… :O

Complete non-story. He didn’t abuse the protesters, he just nicked a single placard that was getting in the way and broke it. Lots of very reasonable people would’ve done the same thing.

5. James Rathbone

I kinda agree with Sagar. Sure he could have asked the guy to remove it, but its not like the protester tried to engage with him. He just shoved his placard into the cameras field of vision, which is fairly obnoxious. I’d have probably done the same thing.

Yeah, I’ve got to agree with what other people have said. Now of all times seems like a bizarre point for a site like this to suddenly come over all petty and sensationalist.

What a crap video. I was expecting some serious Robinson vs inanimate object brutality.

Instead: 5 minutes and 9 seconds of words. Nobody likes words.

And he’s basically within his rights to get rid of something that is interfering with him filming the segment.

Is he really? Since when? Does that also apply to amateur photographers and tourists, or is it only for BBC arselickers? I’d really like to know for the next time I want to take a photo that’s got some sodding great advertising hoarding in the way…

That smug self important Tory twerp is one of the reasons I prefer radio, though he even infects that. Truly a legend in his own mind

Just for the record: I hate Nick Robinson, and think he’s a nasty little Tory to boot.

But nonetheless, this video has been very misleadingly presented, and it lowers the quality of the site. It also undermines the site’s credibility when attacking the distortions of sensationalist rightwing loons.

And he’s basically within his rights to get rid of something that is interfering with him filming the segment.

Does the news have the right to an uncluttered shot?

12. Luis Enrique

oh for God’s sake – all this talk of “rights” … somebody kept waving a placard behind somebody trying to do a shot to camera for national telly, and the telly somebody lost their temper a bit and grabbed the placard and smashed it. Fair play.

But rights are important here.

Robinson was filming in a public place. He had no more or less right to be there than the protester. He also had a right to film but no right to film without interruption.

The protester owned the placard. Robinson had no more right to destroy it then the protester had to smash his camera.

somebody lost their temper a bit and grabbed the placard and smashed it. Fair play.

So if somebody smashes your windscreen or your nose?

And I liked the headline. Especially looking forward to Boris Attacks His Lunch

14. Guy Aitchison

I’ve really no idea why people are objecting so strongly to the title. It describes perfectly well what Nick Robinson was doing. He grabbed and destroyed an anti-war placard; he attacked it. Whether or not it was the right thing to do is another matter. If anything is OTT it’s comparing the presentation of this to Glenn Beck’s nonsense!

“Nick Robinson looses it” the video says.

Nick Robinson makes something less tight? Or are the defenders of our freedoms too busy to check the spelling of things before they put them on the internet.

16. Chaise Guevara

I also think anyone objecting to the title must be watching a different clip.

Basically, Robinson acted like a jerk and demonstrated that he thinks he has the right to subdue other people’s opinions, but it’s not a big deal in the grand scheme of things and certainly has no bearing on the Beeb’s outlook in general.

@15 – given your track record on the abuse of capital letters, I’d say people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones! (though you are right in this case).

@pagar – I love the way you draw no qualitative distinctions between levels of property and types of destruction. How gloriously typical of a libertarian.

18. Luis Enrique

ferchrissakes pagar, when I am in a public place and some papperazi lies on the floor trying to get a photo of my gusset as I clamber out of my Bentley in a mini-skirt (which happens to me a lot), I give that pap a bop on the nose. person behaving like a tit gets what’s coming, his right to be there be damned, and no I wouldn’t like to generalize it into universal principal.

@ Luis

I give that pap a bop on the nose. person behaving like a tit gets what’s coming, his right to be there be damned

You’re well hard.

@ Paul

I love the way you draw no qualitative distinctions between levels of property and types of destruction. How gloriously typical of a libertarian.

Thanks, mate. What distinctions would you make?

I was invited to look at a video entitled “Nick Robinson looses it”. Does that mean “gets loose with his foot on a placard” or “loses his rag”? Either way, two minutes of my life were wasted and can never be retrieved.

@ 1. Paul Sagar

Why is Robinson: “within his rights to get rid of something that is interfering with him filming the segment.”?

If television journalists insist on being filmed outside in public places, whether their location bares any relation to the story or not, they should have to contend with the public being able to exercise free speech.

Bloody he’ll – talk about sense of humour failure. Sorry for writing a headline that is not an accurate dissection of what happened there.

We seem to have acquired a bunch of readers who think they’re sub-editors.

@15 – given your track record on the abuse of capital letters, I’d say people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones! (though you are right in this case).

I think you’ll find capital accumulation is essential for a modern economy.

Wait… I’ve got more.

Given the mess our under-Capitalised banks made of the economy I’d have thought you’d be happy for me to err on the side of caution and throw capitals around willy nilly.

…there’s more!

You anti-capitalist Paul!

…on I go…

I direct capitals to where they are needed but are absent, I’m a venture capitalist.

And I’m all punned out…

Were I not to have self respect I’d get a job as a sub-editor for the sun.

24. Political_Animal

Don’t know about anyone else, but I found it funny, particularly when, instead of just throwing the placard away, he went to all that trouble of breaking it up and then another just appeared in it’s place, over his shoulder!

If television journalists insist on being filmed outside in public places, whether their location bares any relation to the story or not, they should have to contend with the public being able to exercise free speech.

Perhaps Robinson felt his free speech was being interfered with by the protestor.

@21. Bryn Tittle: “…whether their location bares any relation…”

All participants in the video were fully clothed and there is no information about their family backgrounds.

I’m only a secondary modern boy but shouldn’t that be ‘Nick Robinson loses it not ‘Nick Robinson looses it’?

Further proof the BBC made a boob making this Tory dickhead their political correspondent instead of the excellent Martha Kearney.


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    Nick Robinson attacks anti-war placard http://bit.ly/bkYbIL

  2. Clare

    RT @libcon: Nick Robinson attacks anti-war placard http://bit.ly/bkYbIL

  3. Andrew Tindall

    RT @libcon: Nick Robinson attacks anti-war placard http://bit.ly/bkYbIL

  4. Niall Millar

    Chuckle RT: @libcon: Nick Robinson attacks anti-war placard http://bit.ly/bkYbIL

  5. Nick Hider

    RT @libcon: Nick Robinson attacks anti-war placard http://bit.ly/bkYbIL

  6. Jonathan Holt

    Nick Robinson attacks anti-war placard | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/QpP4bwV via @libcon (This man is supposed to be impartial!)





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.