Oh well, I wonder why ? Could it possibly be that the BBC is more financially vulnerable, given British libel law,  to well-paid libel specialists than are a multitude of bloggers ?

"And the BBC stood so solidly behind Andrew Gilligan after he blew the whistle on the sexed up Saddam scoop that he's now working for Iranian TV."

As you well know, a very complicated case which proves little about the BBC in general.

"I've had professional dealings with the BBC - they hired me to consult and do a very short expert slot on one of their shows - and they were indeed hopelessly shambolic and disorganised."

Oh sure, on the basis of your personal - completely objective of course - account - the BBC must be "hopelessly shambolic and disorganised."  That's how they get out widely respected world-wide news coverage in a variety of forms every day.

"The BBC has always been the blandified voice of the establishment - occasionally authoritative, but utterly toothless in the face of real corruption, for the tragically obvious reason that it can't criticise governments aggressively when it relies on those governments for its income."

Oh it's SO easy and self-congratulatory to mock from the sidelines and the fact is that despite its vulnerability to government funding it has been critical and many politicians can only wish, while they're being grilled by Paxman, Humphreys, etc., that your caricature were true.

"As for awards - the media are never self-congratulatory, of course."

Maybe; but they have choices and the awards tend to reflect the BBC's general reputation.

"Rather too much of the top BBC reporting and editorial talent makes the NYT op-ed team look expert."

Generalised jeering is unconvincing.


Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.