Unrepentant BBC’s endangering of Corbyn could have come home to roost today

BBC broadcast information making Labour leader’s home address easy to identify – and declined to delete it when challenged

Some time ago, the BBC broadcast video that made it possible for anyone who wishes to do so to pin down Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s exact address. The nature of that information and of the broadcast will not be disclosed here for obvious reasons.

Only slightly less dangerously than the broadcast that could have revealed Corbyn’s address, the BBC and other media routinely broadcast their ‘doorstepping’ of the Labour leader at his home address, in spite of his clear advice that he will not answer questions outside his home.

Some time later, Corbyn was attacked at Finsbury Park mosque by a right-wing activist. Although Corbyn was struck hard in the head by a fist and the attacker was charged with ‘assault by beating’ and subsequently received a prison sentence, the media persisted in minimising the event – describing it only as an ‘egging’.

In the wake of the Finsbury Park attack, other right-wingers expressed their intention to ‘visit’ Corbyn – and last year, the man who murdered a Muslim outside the same mosque admitted that he had also hoped to kill the Labour leader.

Earlier this month, there was outrage at leaked video footage of UK paratroopers practising on a shooting range by firing at an image of Jeremy Corbyn.

This is not a game. Recklessness by the media can have life or death consequences.

The SKWAWKBOX called the BBC at the beginning of this month and then sent the following by email:

As discussed, the [redacted] shows information that could very easily be used to track down Corbyn’s address.

Response by return please to the following:

1. Will the BBC remove [the information]?
2. There are longstanding criticisms of the practice of door stepping Corbyn, especially when he’s said he won’t answer questions outside his house. Why does the BBC do it and will the BBC stop now, given the security risk?
3. What is the BBC’s comment on putting political leaders at risk in light of this morning’s video of paras shooting – and the attack on Corbyn in Finsbury Park?

As of the time of publication, the BBC has not deleted the information – or even bother to respond to the enquiry, in spite of a promise to do so.

Today, the media are reporting that ‘Extinction Rebellion’ protesters have glued themselves to the fence of Corbyn’s house as part of their protest – claiming that this was to ‘support’ Corbyn in taking action, saying:

He is best hope this country has and we are hear to support him to go further.

Most of the media have covered the protest – and the BBC Newsnight programme’s Twitter account mentioned Extinction Rebellion for the first time ever in a tweet about it:

SKWAWKBOX comment:

The sight of glued protesters might be amusing to some, but it might just as easily have been a right-wing extremist of violent intent who turned up outside Corbyn’s home – potentially facilitated by the UK’s state broadcaster.

Yet the BBC appears to think the matter trivial – and to have no intention of ending or even reducing its ‘doorstepping’ habit.

The security of the likely next Prime Minister – and the hope of millions suffering under the Tories – is put at risk by the behaviour of the media, not to mention the habits of the right-wing press in its use of demonising language about Corbyn and the left in general.

For commercial media to behave in this way is inexcusable, but for the state-funded broadcaster to persistently behave so recklessly – and to brush off the issue when challenged – is unforgivable.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.

26 responses to “Unrepentant BBC’s endangering of Corbyn could have come home to roost today

  1. The BBC has taken a swing to the Right. They were of course always Centrist but now the ‘News’ programmes often have Tories and sundry right wingers from ‘Think Tanks’, highly paid lobbyists – and nobody else. Newsnight has gone hysterical with very excited presenters pulling faces and rolling eyes that become DM and Telegraoh stories in their Only to the left of course; ask Barry how it goes. Their favourite ‘pundit’ at the moment is one G Batten. He’s often on Question Time. Apparently he says he leads the UKIP party who famously have never won a seat in Parliament and has had the support of about 4% in recent opinion polls. Batten is as exciting as a cardboard cut out ; – so it’s hard to see his attraction to BBC Editors.

  2. The BBC, on behalf of the ruling elite, are keeping this information available in the hope some nutter will save them the trouble of having to concoct a Diana-type assassination, should he get to No. 10…

  3. The right to publish any newsworthy story as long as it isn’t fake news or news that strongly leans towards any political party is good news!
    The BBC have for far to long been prejudice towards the Left in and out of Westminster!
    This imbalance drives the hatred of Brexit leavers who continually make themselves the providers of their type of justice, they meat out to those they see as foreigners and those of a different ethnicity religion or creed!
    The likes of UKIP, FARAGE and CAMERON made all this happen along with the MEDIA and NEWS OUTLETS!
    They alone, are responsible for the hate and division of this Country!
    I only hope they are all brought to account, for all the lies they have spoken and we hear everyday!

    • It is not true that Leave voters are the sole cause of hatred and division in this country. Hatred, regrettably, knows no political boundaries, but the majority of both Leave voters and Remain voters are rational, normal people, who respect democracy and have no truck with hatred.
      Nor is it true to suggest that all 17.4 million Leavers are racists. People of all colours support Brexit. Your assertions amount to a form of prejudice against Leavers
      Leave voters are the majority of the electorate, not some extreme racist fringe promoting hatred!

      • Well said Catherine Terrie.

        Rather than attack Leave voters with allegations of “hatred”, perhaps Labour Party members should open their eyes to the true, racist nature of the EU.

        The EU is a profoundly racist organisation.

        The fact that the EU organises, funds and outsources concentration camps for non EU refugees appears a matter of indifference to many Labour Party members, irrespective of widespread torture and rape – including of children – which occurs at the EU-supported concentration camps under brutal regimes.

        Human Rights Watch justifiably observes that “the EU is contributing to a cycle of extreme abuse” and is “complicit in those abuses”.

        See:
        https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/01/21/no-escape-hell/eu-policies-contribute-abuse-migrants-libya

  4. I have no faith in the BBC at all. They act as cheerleaders for the Tories and I deeply resent my licence fee being used for this purpose and to pay astronomical salaries to the likes of Fiona Bruce a disgusting bully who thinks its OK to mock and belittle Diane Abbott ( the most abused person in parliament) and encourage others to do likewise or Laura Kuenssberg who gushes about Theresa May and who deliberately misrepresented Jeremy Corbyn in respect of security issues and got a tiny slap on the wrist for it.
    Now the BBC have identified Jeremy’s home address and refused to take down the information which led the Climate protesters to his door. These people wished Jeremy and his wife no harm but given that the BBC like the rest of the MSM routinely demonise Jeremy it could have been a lot different.
    Being biased and unprofessional is one thing but the reckless endangerment of the Labour Leader and his family is another. I think the party needs to get urgent legal advice on this matter and liaise with the police so that whatever action is necessary to ensure the safety of the Corbyn family is taken.

    • The beeb is truly revolting and doesn’t even try to fake fairness. Those rich brats, entitled and well oiled are probably mummy and daddy’s little Mandelas. That one who does the numbers isn’t the exploding brain after all. I don’t watch the programme since, like other comedies, it isn’t funny. They’ve all been at the fringe which has moved down to Yorkshire. We’re paying that lot and we can’t do a thing about it. We are the mugs and If I see anymore long winded trash about starfish, being commented upon by an old bloke from his front room I will definitely leave on the first plane out to Idlib. Regards

  5. I thought the same when I read a stupid article last year in the Guardian about Corbyn’s allotment. It had several photos, including the number of his plot, and made some fatuous comments about how tidy it was. I wrote to the paper and complained – no reply. But his allotment is his private space, and revealing it opens up all kinds of vulnerabilities for anyone who wants to hurt or damage him, from trashing his vegetables to attacking him physically. The MSM will be guilty, no question, if any harm comes to him.

  6. Extinction rebellion is not all it appears. Whatever they say is their pathetic reason for gluing themselves to Corbyn’s home fence, the optics and publicity tell very different stories and add to endangering Corbyn and family at his home. This is wholly irresponsible action… glue themselves to 10 Downing street fence, Parliament, Whitehall or major corps fences would send a far more appropriate and safe message.

    • The media seem to know where and when they will act. The Met either don’t know or care. Cheers.

  7. Is there a police guard on Jeremy’s home ? If not , why not ? Maybe supporters should volunteer in shifts ! We’ve already lost Jo Cox to some right winged defective !

    • Ms Abbott could do with some protection from the heroic backbenchers of her own party. Any takers? You bet your life there are. Ta ta.

  8. Regards the doorstepping, I’m not sure what “routinely” amounts to, but it sounds as if it happens on a regular basis, and if Jeremy never answers any questions – and he doesn’t actually have to spell it out to them for them to very quickly realise that is the case – then why would they persist and continue to do it. To my mind it amounts to nothing short of harrasment, which is a criminal offence. That said – and apart from the fact that Jeremy and his family are of course entitled to their privacy – it doesn’t make sense to me that the media, whoever they are, should be allowed to do so, and especially so in such febrile times, but ANY time in actual fact. Surely such practices should be forbidden by the police, and the question IS why aren’t they.

    That said, an ‘attack’ on him could happen anywhere, as the mosque incident illustrated, but so-called journalists should not be allowed anywhere near his home address. Do they do it to Theresa May? More to the point, would they ever be allowed to, even when for some reason or other she is particularly newsworthy. Or any other MP for that matter. Not as far as I am aware. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that it is only Jeremy Corbyn who is subjected to this practice, and it’s about time it was brought to an end.

    • It’s very strange but not surprising. Tamsin and Lancelot have become stars as they are perfectly entitled to. But what about Yemen and closer to home Assange could do with moral support. Jemima must know that polar bears aren’t committing suicide. I hope they all get punctures. Ta ta.

  9. The daily harassment of Corbyn by crowds of ‘journalists’ as he leaves his home has been going on since he was elected leader and must be officially sanctioned as would normally be illegal.

  10. Other politicians are doorstepped by TV cameras.
    We’ve seen Amber Rudd leaving her home, Rees-Mogg and his kids shouted at – also Gove, Green, Hunt and others I forget – but I do remember Harold Wilson being virtually surrounded by the press when leaving his home.
    Although I hate to concede a fucking thing to the bastards I think they can claim doorstepping as being accepted practice and not concentrated on Labour.
    Seedy and vile as the motives of the BBC’s paparazzi squad are I’m not sure how politicians can be made an exception if we want the investigation and reporting of corruption and crime to continue.

    • ‘Other politicians are doorstepped by TV cameras.
      We’ve seen Amber Rudd leaving her home, Rees-Mogg and his kids shouted at – also Gove, Green, Hunt and others…’

      On a regular – routine – basis? And what has doorstepping JC continually got to with the investigation and reporting of corruption and crime. Your argument is rather flimsy to say the least.

      • So you’re saying the BBC WON’T be able to claim doorstepping is accepted practice?
        Think harder.
        I disagree with what they’re doing too but if we believe in freedom of the press it has to be evenly applied.
        I know you understand perfectly well that the establishment’s mission is to control the press, the internet, even what kids learn in school.
        Any restrictions on the BBC will be applied tenfold to SB and all our other friends.
        I’m saying we have to pick our battles and this isn’t one we can win – either they can doorstep anyone or they can doorstep no-one.
        The answer is security personnel and cars for Corbyn.
        He might as well get used to it because he can’t avoid it when he’s PM.

      • Corby was attacked. Doesn’t the leader of the opposition warrant some security. Maybe the Frankenstein Castle crew could step up and use their pitchforks to prod a few gluies and stenographers in the bum. Gently of course. I don’t believe in violence especially killing from distance. Pip Pip.

    • Jo Cox wasn’t door-stepped.

      And door stepping is a different issue to the danger posed by right-wing nutters and proper security. Such wouldn’t gain anything from wobbly shots of Corbyn’s front door.

  11. ‘Any restrictions on the BBC will be applied tenfold to SB and all our other friends.’

    Oh, I wasn’t aware that skwawkbox went around doorstepping people. My apologies.

    PS Doorstepping politicians or anyone else has nothing whatsoever to do with journalism and, as such, is NOT a factor in being able to uncover fraud or corruption or crime of any sort. I mean just cite me ONE example of where doorsteing someone has led to the uncovering of criminal activity. Sorry, but I just don’t buy it David.

    Meanwhile, Jeremy comes out the front door of his house, says good morning to any journalists and camera crews assembled outside, gets in the car – or gets on his bike – and disappears off into the blue. What a scoop!

    • Ah, I somehow managed to omit a couple of p’s there, and it obviously should have read doorstepping.

    • FFS don’t be so bloody obtuse.
      I didn’t equate SB with BBC doorstepping in any way – but if the Tories legislate restrictions on the BBC’s doorstepping I FUCKING GUARANTEE it’ll be part of a much bigger body of law designed to crush the new left media.
      Dedicated conspiracy theorist like yourself ought not to need i’s dotted & t’s crossed.

      • David, your ‘argument’, if one can call it that, is so pathetic it’s not worth responding to any further. And needless to say, THAT of course is why you resort to personal abuse. You’re just desperately grasping at straws.

        There is absolutely no reason for so-called journalists to doorstep a politician on a regular basis, and as I pointed out before, they don’t do it to anyone else, and as far as I can recall, I don’t remember them doing it to any other politician in the past.

      • Allan – David is simply pointing out the record of the way in which ‘public protection’ is used as the cover for all sorts of curtailing of freedom. I would have thought that was a given caution.

Leave a Reply