BBC's 'Lamentable ' Jubilee Coverage

[Teddy Bear]

I must admit I haven't watched it, but according to the comments forming this Telegraph article, it was disappointing at best.

BBC under fire over 'lamentable' Jubilee coverage
The BBC is facing criticism over its coverage of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee river pageant, with its on-air commentary described as "lamentable" and one MP accusing it of indulging in "low grade, celebrity driven drivel".

Camera angles and sound quality were also said to have been not up to scratch while a mistaken description of the Queen as "HRH" - rather than "Her Majesty" - also drew flak.

Comedian Stephen Fry - host of the BBC panel show QI - led a chorus of disgruntlement on Twitter, branding the coverage as "mind-numbingly tedious".

But the BBC defended its coverage. A spokesman said: "We're very proud of the quality and breadth of the BBC's coverage of this extraordinary event."

Fry wrote: "Has the BBC ever presented a more mind-numbingly tedious programme in its history? "HRH the queen" said the first ignorant presenter. HRH?".
His remarks appeared to resonate among his online followers, prompting a clarification of his comments in a further posting.

"Don't get me wrong peeps, I'm not saying this in relation to ER II's jubilee - just expected better of the beeb. Didn't mean to upset anyone," he wrote.
One follower responded: "my mate who loves boats is appalled by BBC coverage - sky certainly better and we saw more pageant and less jubilee babies!!".

Kevin Marsh, a former editor of the Today programme and The World at One, appeared to echo Fry's views.

He wrote: "Am I being over-critical or is the BBC commentary lamentable?"
In a retweet, he added: "Why cut away from Queenie's River Pageant to watch that mindless Tess Daly nonsense... scarcely credible."

Other social networkers were equally scathing. One posted: "BBC's coverage of the jubilee is awful! Bad camera angles and bad presenting. Sky much better."

Another said: "Are the BBC trying to be quaint and 'British' with their p*** awful coverage?" One appeared to give up on the broadcaster altogether, writing: "I think I have had enough inane BBC commentary".

Tory MP for Reading East, Rob Wilson, joined the voices condemning the BBC's Jubilee reporting. He wrote: "Seems we all agree on terrible BBC coverage. Low grade, celebrity driven drivel. How did Beeb get it so wrong?"

Another damning posting from the politician read: "Which is worse, the heavy rain falling on the flotilla along the Thames or the BBC's dreadful coverage of this Royal Jubilee event?"

Austin Mitchell, Labour MP for Great Grimsby, described BBC commentary as "pathetic".

[Teddy Bear]

The inept coverage of the BBC on the Jubilee seems to be gaining further publicity with another article in the Telegraph, and also the Mail shown below, and more appearing in other newspapers. I suppose the BBC will justify their poor performance with their usual tripe excuses.

The BBC's coverage of the Thames Pageant was woeful

By David Hughes

The verdict is in and it isn’t good. The BBC’s coverage of the Thames Pageant has been trashed in today’s papers, and rightly so.

The Corporation has in the past set the benchmark for broadcasters around the world when it comes to covering great state occasions. Last year it did a superb job on the Royal Wedding, for example. But yesterday was a car crash, or rather a sinking with all hands. From the moment one of the BBC’s commentators referred to the Queen as “Her Royal Highness” you knew it was going to be a stinker.

Mistake Number One was its incomprehensible refusal to show the pageant from start to finish. This was a unique historical event yet the Beeb seemed to think that viewers couldn't possibly be interested in watching the flotilla and would far prefer to watch C-list celebs spouting nonsense. Mistake Number Two was the failure of its commentators to do anything but the most rudimentary homework about the spectacle they were describing – and their inability to find the language and imagery the occasion required.

Our own Judith Woods was not impressed: “The point is that sometimes, and most incontrovertibly on this occasion, the story is the story and everything else is just an immensely irritating distraction. The BBC, however, failed to grasp the fact that a historic waterborne pageant is all about the flotilla, stupid. Instead, it was all so busy and shouty and celebrity-driven that comparisons with a poor man’s Children in Need were hard to escape.”

Over at the Mail, Jan Moir is also spitting feathers, warning that the BBC’s reputation as a peerless television broadcaster of royal events “just could not survive under an onslaught of inanity, idiocy and full cream sycophancy uttered, muttered and buttered on thickly by a team of presenters who were encouraged to think that they were more important than the events unfolding around them.”

And from the Mail

Where's Dimbleby when you need him? How BBC's coverage of Queen's Thames pageant sank under a tide of inanity

By Jan Moir

The BBC's coverage of the Queen's Thames pageant was condemned today as 'inane' and 'celebrity-driven drivel'.

Despite the attacks, the BBC today defended their coverage and said they were 'very proud'. But MP Rob Wilson dismissed it as 'low grade, celebrity-driven drivel, while Mr Fry's tweet that it was 'inane' and mind-numbingly tedious' was retweeted more than 1,000 times. Other viewers said the show's presenters should have 'shut up' and shown the boats rather than cutting to interviews and features.

An estimated 10.3million people tuned into the coverage, with viewers peaking at 11.9million. Despite so many people sticking with the BBC, Sky News were applauded for doing a slightly better job of the historic event.

Here JAN MOIR gives her take on what she witnessed on a historic day.

Turn the royal trumpets to the parp and piffle setting. Muffle the funeral drums. For on a molten grey stretch of the Thames, with a global television audience of millions watching, something died yesterday.
Missing the wow moment: The BBC hadn't done their homework

It was the BBC’s reputation as a peerless television broadcaster of royal events. It just could not survive under an onslaught of inanity, idiocy and full cream sycophancy uttered, muttered and buttered on thickly by a team of presenters who were encouraged to think that they were more important than the events unfolding around them.

Someone, somewhere thought that their celebrity personalities were enough to see them through this all-day broadcast. How very wrong they were.

‘I’ve just spotted my 70-year-old dad out there,’ gurgled Sophie Raworth, as barges packed with senior royals and VIPs slid by, unremarked upon. Who was in all the other boats? We never did find out.

Yes, the BBC1 coverage of the Diamond Jubilee Thames Pageant was historical — historically awful.

Time and time again, their cameras cut away from the magnificent river sights — never seen before, never to be seen again — to watch Tess Daly, with a pineapple fascinator on her head, jiving in a park. Or Anneka Rice wittering on about art.

Or John Sergeant on Westminster Bridge, wearing a shiver-me-timbers cap at a jaunty angle and threatening to talk ‘about the pomp and pageantry with the actor Richard E. Grant’.
Patronising: Sophie Raworth and Matt Baker failed to impress while presenting the Jubilee river pageant yesterday



TWITTER USERS BRAND BBC'S COVERAGE 'INANE' AND 'BORING'

Stephen Fry wrote: 'Has the BBC ever presented a more mind-numbingly tedious programme in its history? 'HRH the queen' said the first ignorant presenter. HRH?'

Jonathan Dimbleby, broadcaster, and son of Richard Dimbleby, Tweeted: 'Dire reaction to BBC coverage of another great event. Am asked whether bigwigs have lost the plot. Good question to Any Questions.'

Austin Mitchell, Labour MP said: 'One hated Thames Armada. No Navy left so hordes of tatty boats. Queen freezing, BBC 5Live and TV commentary pathetic. A disgrace.'

Paul Waugh, editor of PoliticsHome, Tweeted: 'Sky killing BBC so far in #Jubilee coverage. Beeb keep cutting to useless 'features' instead of *showing us what's happening*'

Ben Stone, radio presenter: 'BBC getting hammered for Thames Paegant coverage - have to say, they had a strange mixture of personalities working on the day. #jubilee'

Twitter user Deborah Thomas, wrote: 'Glad BBC were pilloried for their Jubilee coverage. Ironic that Sky were much better, even though it's owned by a Republican. #publicservice'

Another user, BlackQueen, said: 'Inane interviews. Shut up + just show the boats! #bbc #jubilee'

Tory MP Rob Wilson wrote: 'Seems we all agree on terrible BBC coverage. Low grade, celebrity driven drivel. How did Beeb get it so wrong?'

What were Beeb bosses thinking? If ever an event was crying out for a Dimbleby to dimble nimbly in the shallows, with that trademark mixture of gravitas, humour and sagacity, then this was it.

Instead, we got Sophie Raworth and Matt Baker, bouncing around as if they were presiding over the jelly stall at a chimps’ tea party, somehow managing to sound patronising about nearly everything.

‘Look at the Queen — 86 years old and she has not sat down. She looks like she is having a wonderful time,’ said Sophie as a sodden and rather glum-faced monarch sailed past.

Trapped in what appeared to be the VIP vodka lounge of some hideous 80s disco, Matt and Sophie couldn’t have been more inappropriate.

Even when BBC commentator Paul Dickenson was talking, it seemed to be obvious that no one had done any homework. ‘Tower Bridge is about as iconic as it gets,’ he said at one point.

There was no research, no facts, no sense of significance, in fact no sense at all. Matt didn’t know what semaphore was. He worried about all the royals and everyone else being trapped for hours in the boats. ‘Do they need toilet breaks?’ he wondered. ‘Are they cross-legged . . .?’

Sky was better, but not by much. Adam Boulton looked ridiculous in a St Tropez-style shocking pink jacket, the approximate dimensions of a deck chair.

And a little of anchor Eamonn Holmes being sardonic goes a long, long way, especially when he cannot find it in himself to lay off the ship’s hooter jokes.

‘I’m surrounded by hooters this morning,’ he said, sitting between two female presenters. Eamonn we get it. Now get over it.

And it all started out so well.Down by the early morning Thames, there were battleship grey skies to match the battleship grey boats. It was raining cats and corgis. The river looked like a dirty puddle but with both BBC News and Sky committed to all-day broadcasts (while ITV confined its pageant coverage to the news slots) everyone was seizing the opportunity to wear a plastic mac, shout at pensioners and talk about the weather to desperately fill time.

Anna Botting reporting at Putney Bridge for Sky News looked like a drowned rat as she interviewed a safety officer.

‘The weather is disappointing, isn’t it?’ she said.

‘Keep dry and keep moving,’ he advised.

‘The Thames can be hazardous, can’t it?’ she persisted. ‘I know from personal experience that wind over tides can be bad.’

‘Keep a good look out,’ the officer advised.

‘When you are rowing, everything is behind you,’ she went on.

Really, Anna is wasted on Sky News, isn’t she? Can’t a role be found for her on Sea-Beebies?

Over on BBC1, early-bird Andrew Marr was promising that history would be unfolding at every step but, he wondered, what will be the biggest wow moment?

Actually, Andrew, one of the biggest wow moments was when the Spirit of Chartwell sailed through the open gates of Tower Bridge.

However, we didn’t see this on the BBC because when it happened, we were forced to watch Fearne Cotton in silver slingbacks trying to interview some shark-wrestling World War II veterans; men who had nearly died for their country and who deserved to be treated with respect.

‘Now Jim, er, John, this is obviously a huge ship, this is a weighty ship. How have you enjoyed your day cheering the Queen?’

It was painful, like watching Peppa Pig interview Alain de Botton.

Meanwhile, as more incredible seafaring spectacles unfurled on the Thames, we were below deck on a historical ship with arch bores Sandi Toksvig, Griff Rhys Jones, Maureen Lipman and Omid Djalili.

Tell me this. Why is there never a torpedo handy when you need one? ‘We were a lot funnier earlier on,’ Maureen moaned to the cameras.

Yes. About 20 years ago.

Last word goes to Sky’s Kay Burley, quite my favourite outside broadcaster. Kay is full of the milk of human kindness, only it is very, very skimmed.

She said she was at what sounded like the ‘mustard station’, interviewing dachshunds wearing bow ties. The joy of events like this should be that there are professional broadcasters to help bring the scenes alive for viewers at home. Over to you, Kay Burley.

‘There is a lot of horns and stuff going off,’ she said.

Anything else happening?

‘There are rowing boats, famous boats, kayaks, canoes and historical boats.’

Thank you and goodnight.

[Teddy Bear]

As this article shows, here come the 'tripe excuses' I predicted.

Man responsible for BBC coverage of Queen's Thames Pageant blames the rain as he is attacked on all sides for 'Inane' and 'celebrity-driven drivel'


The man behind the BBC's Diamond Jubilee coverage has blamed the rain as the corporation today faced a stinging backlash from viewers over 'inane' and 'mind-numbingly tedious' coverage.
Poor weather caused a number of technical problems with the sound cutting out during musical performances.

Mr Weston said: ''We did our best on an extraordinarily technically complicated broadcast in abject difficult weather.

In defending the editorial decisions he said he had a choice either to just 'point and shoot' the event or 'try and bring it to life'.


Bring it to life? It shows the BBC arrogant mindset that they believe this event would lack life in itself, and that only they can inject the vital power into it.

Most have said Sky did a much better job, and they had the same 'abject miserable' weather.

[Teddy Bear]

You'd think they'd learn from the criticisms already levelled at them, but the BBC go on getting it wrong.

BBC blasted for Jubilee coverage again: Fearne Cotton interviews Paloma Faith about commemorative SICK BAG amid backlash over 'ruined' fireworks display
Paloma Faith also shows off a solar-powered model of the Queen and Monarch-shaped ice cream scoop during bizarre royal memorabilia section
Twitter user writes BBC should find the person responsible and 'sack them'
Incident happened as Sky broadcast remarkable scenes of build-up at Admiralty Arch
Comes amid fierce criticism that BBC ruined incredible Diamond Jubilee Concert firework display by running programme credits over it
Rushed ending to spectacular show was to make way for Euro 2012 advert
And it all looked like it was going so well when Huw Edwards was called in to save the day...


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2154927/Diamond-Jubilee-BBC-blasted-amid-backlash-ruined-fireworks-display.html

[Teddy Bear]

The following article, written by the woman who was married to Jonathan Dimbleby for 35 years, talks about what she sees as the real reason for the pathetic BBC coverage of this historic event.

The BBC got the pageant so wrong because it holds those who love the royals in contempt

By Bel Mooney

Why didn’t I just switch to another channel? On great occasions, long habit makes me (and countless others) tune in to the BBC.

After the first hour of watching the historic water-borne pageant to honour the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee, I remained with the national broadcaster in mounting disbelief, fixed like a rabbit in the headlights, unable to credit the level to which this once-great British institution had sunk.

The BBC’s coverage of one of the most memorable national events to happen in my lifetime was so bad that you went on watching, wondering if it could get any worse. And, each time, it did.

Better to have been drenched by icy rain on one of the bridges than to sit comfortably at home listening to a stream of inanities uttered by a bunch of low-level TV ‘stars’.

Better to have had conversations with strangers who felt in tune with the spirit of the event, than to have been insulted by the amateurish ignorance of people with no clue about its meaning.

They were as inarticulate, ill-informed, patronising, foolish, and unprofessional a bunch as it’s ever been my misfortune to see.

The condemnation — on social networking pages, Twitter, and online — has been universal.

Insulting
We saw Clare Balding aboard the magnificent rowing barge Gloriana shouting that the event was all about ‘empowerment’ and ‘diversity’. Er, no it wasn’t, it was about the Queen.

We heard some idiot call the Queen ‘HRH’ (what?) instead of ‘Her Majesty’, someone else talked about her as being a ‘precious piece of cargo,’ while the top deck of a boat was described as the ‘first floor’. Lord Nelson, spin in your grave.

All-purpose showbiz type John Barrowman told us that the bell-ringers would play some ‘tunes’ (that’s not what they do, John), while fluffy little Fearne Cotton was insulting World War II veterans by her very presence on HMS Belfast. (How I wished for Kate Adie, who would have done a fine job).

The BBC once again misjudged the mood of the nation: Crowds turned out in full force despite the weather to watch the Queen pass on the Royal barge

The whole fiasco was linked by anodyne Matt Baker and grinning Sophie Raworth, who had nothing interesting or informative to say about anything at all. I won’t go on. It makes me want to weep.

Remembering that the BBC’s coverage was watched all round the world, all this makes you cringe with shame.

Was it really the best they could come up with? Presumably yes, otherwise why inflict it on us —licence-payers all?

That being the case, and given that some hapless BBC stooge has already defended ‘the quality and breadth’ of its lamentable coverage — we have to ask the important question: why? How could they get it so wrong yet be proud of doing so?

A former BBC channel controller (no less) wrote on my own Facebook page that the coverage was ‘under-researched, under-prepared and under-cast.’ Yesterday, the Mail’s Jan Moir bewailed the absence of ‘a Dimbleby . . . with that trademark mixture of gravitas, humour and sagacity’.

Of course, either David or Jonathan (to whom I was married for 35 years) would have done a sterling job and put all the young pretenders in the shade.

But it was their father, the great Richard Dimbleby who set the benchmark for research and preparedness — and the total lack of it yesterday reveals much about what the BBC has become.

This is not a complaint about individuals, it is about a whole culture.

In 1952, the BBC’s official line was a belief in ‘the power of broadcasting to enrich the spirit as well as the mind of man.’ There’s a noble thought for you!

Nobody else conveyed that mood like Richard Dimbleby, rightly called ‘the voice of the nation’. He took six whole months preparing for the Coronation commentary. He knew every detail of the service and could explain every minute point of the ritual. It goes without saying that he knew the names of everybody in the Abbey, and much about their individual histories.

His art was to describe and interpret what was going on in language that matched the occasion’s significance and beauty.

In the 15 years between 1950 and 1965, Richard Dimbleby covered more than 500 outside broadcasts for radio and television and 150 major national occasions.

Each one was prepared for with meticulous attention to detail, obsessively careful timing, and reams of informative notes — so that any gap in proceedings could be filled with history, with interpretation, with the tiniest facts, like the name of a horse. He called it his ‘homework’.

Since those great days there have been other talented television presenters (including his two sons) who’ve been glad to put in the hard work without which it’s impossible to cope with the unexpectedness of any live broadcast. Did any of the presenters the BBC lined up for us on Sunday do any work at all?

We were crying out for information about the amazing, unique flotilla, about the historic London skyline, even (say) some detail about what the play War Horse is about — when the great puppet appeared atop the National Theatre. Nothing.

What was the meaning of the semaphore message sent by the troupe of dancers with flags on the roof of the Royal Festival Hall? Dunno, the commentator said. It was almost funny.
Sabotage

And since the broadcast’s producers saw fit to cut away from any significant moment (such as when the Queen’s vessel passed under London Bridge) and viewers were inflicted with the burblings of Sandi Toksvig or Anneka Rice, we can only assume that not only did they not want us to understand, they wanted to prevent us seeing as well.

Was it a subconscious wish to sabotage the wonder of the event?

Richard Dimbleby saw television as a mirror held up to society to reflect reality. He knew that the commentator at a great event would, through preparation, language and attitude, show respect not only to the event being televised, but to all those who — through the medium — would have a ringside seat.

No respect was shown by the BBC on Sunday — no respect to the Queen, or to us the viewers.

It so happens that the pageant managed to transcend the coverage, and I for one felt proud to be British. But the televisual mirror held up by the BBC reflects a sad, and tacky, reality.

The question is — who assembled the cast list? Which callow executives (probably not that long out of university) were charged with choosing which ‘journalists’ would front what was meant to be a magnificent expression of national self-esteem at a time of low morale and economic uncertainty?

Did they think it mattered at all?

How could they get it so wrong — fancying that we, the British people, would want the witterings of Fearne Cotton and Tess Daly, rather than (say) the knowledge of historians David Starkey or Bettany Hughes?

The trite, bitty coverage showed that dumbed-down terror of seriousness and the vacuous adulation of so-called celebrity which is — tragically — the BBC’s version of the spirit of our age.
Pathetic

The trouble is, the bigwigs at the Beeb simply do not get it. They are embarrassed by these great occasions and wish they’d go away so they can get back to throwing money at programmes like The Voice.

They’d never dream of being out there, waving flags, dressed in red, white and blue. Almost certainly they regard streets decked with red, white and blue as a somewhat pathetic throwback to an outmoded, deferential age.

It’s worth remembering that the memoirs of veteran broadcaster Peter Sissons revealed how on the death of the Queen Mother he was ordered not to wear a black tie to present the news and that ‘there was high-level opposition among senior [BBC] managers to going overboard when she died’.

Then, as now, they got the mood of the nation badly wrong.

The sad truth is this: these highly paid people regard with contempt those men and women — rich and poor, young and old, British and foreign — who are thrilled by the longevity of Elizabeth II’s reign.

They regard with contempt those who understand that supporting the monarchy means being loyal to the Queen’s heirs as well as to her, and whose hearts swell when a soaking choir bravely belts out ‘Rule Britannia’.

And those who truly believe that — for all its many faults — this remains one of the best countries in the world to live in, which is, in no small way, due to the pride we have in our Queen, our traditions, our proud history.

We deserved to have our minds and spirits uplifted by the BBC — and yet, once again, unforgivably, they let us down.

[Teddy Bear]

I must include this article by Janet Daley at the Telegraph. It encapsulates the BBC arrogance and mindset in justifying their manner of coverage.

BBC's Jubilee coverage: never apologise, never explain
By Janet Daley

The BBC's coverage - still not apologising

So the BBC has dismissed all the criticism of its ludicrous coverage of the Diamond Jubilee. What's new? The BBC, as its critics really ought to know by now, is Never Wrong. The babyish, ignorant, patronising tone of its broadcasting during the Jubilee celebrations was perfect for the occasion, according to the Corporation's official spokesman – and this was proven by the fact that its programming had been watched by more than 60 per cent of the total audience. Which is to say that nearly half of viewers went elsewhere – a quite remarkable failure rate for the national broadcaster which would once have been the unquestionable voice of the entire nation.

The official spokesman, who remains (for his own protection, presumably) nameless, expands on this theme by insisting that "We're very proud of the quality and breadth" of the coverage. (Could this be a joke? Never mind the quality, look at the breadth?) Then he goes on to cite the stats: an average of 10.3 million viewers tuned in. By the end at 6pm, 10.8 million were still watching, etc. As if this mechanistic headcount were the only measure that the BBC now considered, when evaluating the worth of its own content.

Above all, one is struck by the arrogance, the sheer tactless stupidity of this refusal to address the criticisms that have been made of it. What private organisation could afford to be so sublimely oblivious to a torrent of public outrage? Even monstrously insensitive global companies have been taught by their PR consultants that they must not appear callously indifferent to public opprobium. In an age when professional public relations advice is considered essential by every public body, from political parties to arts institutions, this snotty, imperious attitude is not just offensive but amateurish.

[Teddy Bear]

A very credible explanation that would account for much of the BBC's output and agenda.What better way to enhance their own perceived elitism than by dumbing down the rest of society under the pretext of not making the dumber ones among us feel excluded?

It shows what a moronic society the BBC are creating, and will continue to create.

Why I hate the snobbery and elitism of the 'anti-elitist' BBC

By David Thomas

Do you think you’re thick? Are you so completely incapable of having a single serious thought in your head that you switch off the TV the moment someone says something intelligent, knowledgeable or genuinely informative?

Come to think of it, are these sentences, y’know, just a little bit too complicated to handle?

No, I didn’t think so. But then, I don’t work for the BBC. So I’ve spent the past thirty years believing that if I write in clear, straightforward, grown-up English prose then readers of all ages, classes, genders and races will have no trouble understanding me. They may not agree. They may not be remotely interested. But they’ll get it.

The BBC, however, disagrees. In its prime it operated on the genuinely egalitarian principle that everyone, irrespective of background, deserved the best possible quality broadcasting. Generations grew up trusting the BBC to provide the most honest, reliable news; the finest drama; the funniest comedy; the most gripping sport and, on the great occasional that brought the nation together, the most elegant, appropriate and, yes, classy coverage.

But then something changed. The BBC, like so much of the British establishment, lost its self-confidence and became infected by the same, unthinking, supposedly progressive intellectual viruses that gripped our educationists, public services and politicians. Uniquely in the world – for no other culture, from the most greedily capitalist to the most repressively communist has this problem – our pale-pink opinion formers decided that ‘elite’ was a dirty word.

Obsessed by class and privilege they made a fatal confusion between social elitism and the attainment of elite achievement. The SAS , for example, is an elite military unit because the men who serve in it are among the very finest soldiers in the world. A Harley Street surgeon; a soloist in the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra; a garden designer who wins a gold medal at Chelsea; a professor of astrophysics at Imperial College – all these are elite members of their respective professions. And in a sane world, all would be valued for their achievements.

But the BBC is gripped by the idea that if one person is elite, then a lot of other people, who are not elite are being harmed or discriminated against in some way. More than that, it is not right or fair to force the values of the elite onto ordinary people.

I suppose there is some shred of reason in that argument. But there are two immediate flaws. The first is that the upper reaches of the BBC are populated almost exclusively by privately-educated products of Oxford and Camgridge – a essentially, the same kind of people who inhabit the front benches in the Commons, but wearing slightly trendier clothes. ‘Out of touch’ doesn’t begin to describe them – though ‘undeservingly elite’ just might.

The second problem is that they assume that so-called ‘ordinary people’ have no interest whatever in ‘elite’ concepts like, say, complicated information, serious history, moral debate, literature, classical music or opera. They work on the basis that the British population is stupid, crass, incurious and incapable of grasping anything that is not pitched at the level of a six year-old with attention deficit disorder.

That’s why so much of the Jubilee coverage was so appalling. The BBC didn’t think that you would be remotely interested in knowing where the boats in the flotilla had come from, or what their histories were, or who was sailing in them. All the months that people had spent preparing for this great moment, all the history represented in those boats, all the fascinating human stories that must have been going down the Thames on Sunday … In the minds of BBC management, you were far too moronic to be interested in any of that. All you wanted to see was one set of nitwitted z-listers wittering witlessly at another.

So what it amounts to is that the BBC’s idea of being ‘anti-elitist’ is having rich, highly educated, immensely privileged people treating their viewers like idiots.

And what could be more elitist than that?

[Teddy Bear]

Fearne Cotton, a BBC presenter who had quite a few of the 4,500 complaints levelled at the BBC directed at her, has responded to these complaints. In true BBC style, she dismisses the complaints as completely unfair, and accuses those who did complain as being nothing more than bullies. In her eyes her contribution was flawless.

It shows the mindset of so many who work for the corporation.
It's not the fault of the BBC - but the viewers.

The British society is truly dumbed down - they continue to support this imbecilic media behemoth.

People who criticised my Jubilee presenting are just bullies, says Fearne Cotton (who fronted segment on celebration sickbags and called war veteran by the wrong name)

Presenter tweeted: ' I love my job and wouldn't be doing it if i wasn't any good at it'
Number of complaints at BBC's Diamond Jubilee coverage approaches 5,000
Jubilee pageant coverage alone garners more than 2,000 complaints
Clare Balding admits coverage of pageant was 'inane'

By Paul Revoir and Mark Duell

Fearne Cotton yesterday hit back at the ‘huge bullies’ who have criticised her lacklustre presenting of the BBC’s Diamond Jubilee coverage.

In an emotional series of Twitter messages, the 30-year-old also revealed she had suffered bullying at school – and would not accept it again.

The Radio One host tweeted: ‘I was bullied at school so there’s no way I’m having it as a grown woman.

‘Grown men who slag me off in articles or online are huge bullies.

‘I’m from a working-class family and have worked hard to get to where I am today. Others will just sit and do nothing but judge.

‘People who sit lazily and judge others will never grow. They’ll never take a look at themselves or feel content. Shame so many do.

‘I love my job and wouldn’t be doing it if I wasn’t any good at it. I have been working non-stop for 15 years, thank you.’

She also hit back directly at one Twitter user, who wrote: ‘You were pretty rubbish on the Pageant day, love. And if you can’t see why, then maybe you should find a new career.’

She responded: ‘This is what I’m talking about. YOU=bully. Take a look at yourself.’

And in response to those claiming they had the right to an opinion about her presenting, Miss Cotton added: ‘Opinions are one thing, outright bullying is another. VERY different.’

By yesterday afternoon the BBC had received 4,487 complaints about its Jubilee coverage, with Miss Cotton’s item on Tuesday about a sick bag adorned with the Queen’s face proving the most controversial. Two thousand complaints focused on the quality of the coverage of Sunday's pageant.

Miss Cotton was also heavily criticised for addressing a war veteran called John as Jim during an interview on board HMS Belfast on Sunday.

Although the presenter later congratulated herself and her colleagues on ‘seven hours of spotless TV’, the viewers were less impressed, saying she was ‘out of her depth’, ‘irritating’ and ‘sycophantic’.

Her impassioned defence of her performance came after another one of the Corporation's main presenters admitted its Diamond Jubilee coverage misfired.

Clare Balding confessed she believed the corporation’s coverage of the river pageant fell short.

And in an acknowledgement of the audience’s frustration at the ‘inane’ commentary, she said: ‘If you ever hear me say the atmosphere is wonderful, shoot me.’

Miss Balding was the first presenter to speak out about the coverage, which brought more than 3,600 complaints.

She said at the Hay Festival: ‘I think (the BBC’s) aim with the pageant was to give a festival atmosphere.

‘They were worried that a camera just looking at a boat might be a bit dull. It was done with the best of intentions. There was a lot going on that was difficult to deal with.’

Miss Balding reported from the £1million rowing boat Gloriana and said that six out of the nine cameras on the vessels were not working and bad weather caused communications problems between producers and presenters.

She suggested better preparation would have helped, adding: ‘It is difficult to cover a big event. You have a minute to make an impact.

'Because of my sports background I believe facts are my friend.

'If you ever hear me say the atmosphere is wonderful, shoot me.’

The BBC's creative director, Alan Yentob, acknowledged it had misjudged certain aspects of the coverage. He said: 'Nothing gets a universal three cheers.' But he added: 'I can honestly say the BBC has never had a challenge as staggeringly big as this.'

[Teddy Bear]

The contempt and assumption of stupidity that the BBC regard their paying public with is highlighted by the director general mark Thomson's assertion today that the reason for the poor coverage of the Jubilee was due to the rain.

Whereas most people agreed that the Sky coverage of the event was done very well.

Do you think the rain that fell on the BBC was different to that of Sky?

Don't blame us, blame the rain for poor Jubilee coverage, says BBC chief after 4,500 complaints

Mark Thompson blames rain for BBC's problematic Jubilee coverage