Cynic, moi? Oui.

I've just done three week's work at the BBC and it has been an eye-opener.  On my first day there I was asked to lock myself away and do a self-study programme on 'Trust'.  Here's where the cynicism comes in - I assumed that this was no more than a hoop that I had to jump through, a tick in the box, just like when IBM insisted we all read a stultefyingly boring document called Business Conduct Guidelines every year.  Once it was done, backsides had been covered, and life went on.

I was shocked, genuinely shocked, to find that it was for real.  I suppose that's a legacy of ITV's dodgy competitions, and the general malaise in the tabloid newspaper industry, but my respect for the Beeb grew hugely over those three weeks - my goodness that organisation has standards, and it tries to live by them.

Have a look at the BBC College of Journalism site - here's the link http://www.bbc.co.uk/journalism/ethics-and-values/trust-and-choices/trust-and-tv-documentary.shtml - it's a good read.

I learned the hard way.  I interviewed someone for a piece I was doing, and because the sound wasn't as good on my questions as I would have wished - that was 100% user error on my part - I recorded the same questions live back at the studios, and did the edit.  The questions were exactly the same - not a word was changed - but the producer made me do it again as it was written as an interview but the listener could tell the questions were recorded elsewhere.

I've always been a Beeb listener - I'm a Radio 4 man - but I'll do it with even more respect from now on.

Angry

Amy Winehouse is dead.  Hardly a surprise and, of course, it's terrible that anyone should die at such an early age.  That said, the reaction, especially on Sky News, was OTT.  When 93 - and counting - people who wanted to live are killed in Norway, and famine is striking Africa yet again, forgive me if I don't spend too much time mourning someone who for years had given a damned good impression of having a death wish.

Predictably, 'Legend' is being bandied about, and I suppose it will be used in the coming years, but someone who made two albums - one good, and one excellent - hardly earned that description in my book.

What a waste of talent: now excuse me if I think more about those who want to live but have had the opportunity taken from them - many of them would have loved to have got to 27!

How big are Cameron's balls?

Dodgy Dave went on the attack today, and his comment about Alastair Campbell 'doctoring' documents was a fascinating one.  When he said it in the House, of course, he was protected by parliamentary privilege, but I very much doubt he'll utter those words outside.  My recollection is that none of the inquiries found any evidence to support Cameron's accusation, and unless he knows something we don't, it was straightforward mud-slinging.  Come on Dave, say it in public if you think you're hard enough!

The disappointment of the day for me was Ed Milliband.  I was convinced that he was the wrong brother when he was elected leader, and a few good days of late, followed by today's lacklustre one, have done nothing to change my view.  I've let my Labour party membership lapse, and I'll only renew it when the party comes to its senses and ditches our loser of a leader.

As an aside, when the 'comedian' Jonnie Marbles custard pie'd YMG yesterday, the first thought that went through my mind was, "I wonder who paid him to do it?"  It was such an obvious way for YMG to get public sympathy that I assumed that it was a stunt thought up by one of his PR people.  Seemingly I was wrong in that assumption - it was all Marbles' own idea.  Maybe I'm just too cynical for my own good, or perhaps that's what the tabloid press has done to me and many others.

Mauled by kittens

Having spent the afternoon watching the Murdochs and now Rebekka Brooks facing their parliamentary inquisitors, I've simply had my previous view confirmed: the gulf between people who succeed in business, and those who enter parliament, is huge. 

Most of the MPs didn't have a clue about how to tackle questioning powerful figures, and were, in the main, simply hamming it up for the cameras - I doubt the Murdochs could believe how easy it all was.  Any journalist or salesperson would have done a better job.  I'm staggered that the MPs generally seemed to believe that convoluted three- or four-part questions were the way to get at the truth: most of the time our elected representatives seemed to confuse themselves rather than worry the interviewee.

  I actually felt sorry for Young Mr Grace, as he didn't really seem to be fully engaged it matters at the start, and it came over as a bunch of bullies having a pop at a very old man.  Later on he got into his stride - well, it was more of a totter, but it was still too good for the committee.  Son James was simply too well briefed and too smooth - they didn't lay a finger on him.  It staggered me that the MPs believed that the men (and woman) at the top of a huge multi-national should have known every detail of what was going on - like all CEOs and Chairmen, they get told what they want to hear most of the time.

A self-publicising stand-up comedian throwing shaving foam in his face was a godsend for the octogenarian YMG - mugging old people offends British sensibilities.

Of the MPs, Tom Watson at least managed a decent imitation of being menacing, but the rest just huffed and puffed.

If you want it in footballing terms, I reckon it was probably something like 5-1 to the Murdochs and Ms Brooks, and to misquote  George Bernard Shaw, 'He can that can does. He who cannot, ends up on the Commons Media Committee'.

Are you being hacked?

I'm old enough to remember the extremely politically incorrect BBC show, 'Are You Being Served?'  It ran from the early 70s through to the mid 80s, and was set in a London department store called Grace Brothers. It featured John Inman as the effeminate, camp Mr Humphries, who would squeak every so often, 'I'm free!' as he minced around the menswear department, and Molly Sugden as the wisteria-rinsed Mrs Slocombe who spent the entire series referring to her cat as her pussy.  A prime example being "Animals are very psychic; the least sign of danger and my pussy's hair stands on end".  I kid you not - this was what the great British public watched and loved 30 years ago!



The store's owner was Young Mr Grace, an octogenarian who was pushed around in a wheelchair by two mini-skirted bimbos dressed vaguely as nurses.  Mr Grace would periodically visit the store and praise the staff by saying 'You've all done very well!', before collapsing into the arms of his nurses. 



So what has brought this unfunny show to mind?  It was Rupert Murdoch's comments to the Wall Street Journal that he and others in management had handled the hacking crisis "extremely well in every way possible" with just a few "minor mistakes."  What?

When you see the once all-conquering Murdoch dwarfed by his security men as they clear a path for him, and then you read comments such as those quoted, which border on delusional, then it's hard not to see him as Young Mr Grace.  If you're old enough to remember the show, I defy you to tell me otherwise. 

When he gives his evidence to the select committee next week, think Young Mr Grace, and then whatever he says and does can't possibly be scary.

Dave ducking and diving

Can someone please explian what David Cameron meant when he said that he gave Andy Coulson 'a second chance'?  My understanding was that Coulson denied (possiblly still denies) any knowledge of phone hacking or other illegality, and that Cameron appeared to accept that.  Surely then, there was nothing to forgive?

A very unusual phrase from our Prime Minister, and one that I suspect he'll come to regret.  One thing is clear, those who said that it was barmy to appoint Coulson have been proved right.  Even if Coulson walks away from this without a stain on his character, the furore has dragged Dave into the spotlight and made him look, frankly, a bit of a fool, and extremely light on good judgement.  How I enjoyed watching him squirm!

Clegg, Cable, Osborne and Cameron...what will become of this country?

Should we be shocked?

The suggestion that the voicemail of Milly Dowler, and quite possibly those of other murder victims or their relatives, have been hacked into, seems to have shocked the nation.  Why?  I would have been more surprised had it not been going on.

We have a tabloid press that has got itself into a spiral where each paper has to try to outdo its rivals in terms of scoops, exclusives, or sleaze.  They do it for one simple reason and that's because people want to read it, so a lot of the mock indignation doesn't sit comfortably with me.  There are only two things that can stop the sort of nonsense induged in by the NotW (and, more than likely, some of its rivals):  either people stop buying it, which isn't going to happen, or advertisers stop spending.  It seems that the latter might just be happening, but forgive me if I'm cynical about that too.

Are the companies that are considering taking their advertising away doing it for honourable reasons, or for commercial ones?  Do their managements really care about what's been going on, or are they simply trying to score a few brownie points with their customers, and perhaps an edge over their competitors by beating them to the punch ?  If it was the former they'd have done it years ago, but the truth is that they value access to the NotW's demographic much more than some sort of a moral stance. 

My bet is that those who stop advertising will hold a watching brief: if the NotW's readership levels hold up then they'll be back after a suitably decent interval - that will be precisely how long they think it takes for enough people to have forgotten about the current furore.

Principle?  Don't make me laugh!