Anyone switching on BBC Radio 4’s Six O’Clock News on Friday May 3rd 2025 in the hope of hearing more about the shock local and mayoral election results and Reform’s dramatic success was in for a surprise – unless of course the would-be listener was already familiar with BBC priorities.
As Big Ben’s chimes faded away the bulletin kicked off with “The Duke of Sussex says he would love a reconciliation with the Royal Family”…
Er, what? Some mistake, surely? Had by some mischance the BBC accidentally plugged in to a previous edition? For an extraordinary 40 seconds the headline bragged about the BBC’s exclusive non-story and featured two clips from the wittering petulant prince.
Only then did the headlines switch off to the day’s “other main news” into which Reform’s remarkable impact on the political landscape had been relegated.
Now, to be fair the BBC newsreader did say next “Reform redraws the political map…”, a line that ought to have indicated the story’s importance, and the bulletin did go on to feature extensive coverage of the day’s events. But that news only came after subjecting listeners to an incredible six minutes of the one-time spare heir’s ponderous revelations about his tortured life.
BBC1’s News at Six was almost identical, also running with (and boasting about) Harry as the exclusive top story. Incredibly though, viewers were treated to a bone-numbing 10 minutes (a staggering one-third of the programme) of Harry before the election results were touched.
One might have thought that a political party redrawing the political map would have pushed any other story out of sight. Instead, the BBC decided that an ex-pat Royal’s meandering moans were of far more significance to the nation and thus deserved top billing.
It’s a remarkable example of the national broadcaster’s and its staff’s patent devotion to subtly imposing its own agenda on the country, prioritising its ‘exclusive’ over what was so obviously the real Big Story of the day – so big in fact that it may mark the direction this country takes over the next decade. It was, by even the most elementary and banal measure an extraordinary editorial failure.
You can listen to the Radio 4 bulletin here and the BBC1 version here. You can make a complaint here, should you feel so inclined.
Anyone switching to the BBC News website was treated to much of the same. Here are its top stories for Saturday May 3rd:
Now, it’s also true that above those stories was a banner with clickable election results. And you can see from the screen grab that the election is covered but is still marginalised from the big picture of the retired royal soldier.
One has to wonder – had Labour won the day, would that have been pushed into second place? At least by Saturday morning (May 3rd) the elections had found their proper place as the top story on Today, with the Duke of Sussex suitably shunted down the running order.
At least the BBC’s Chris Mason had this to say on the BBC News website:
But it is wise, too, to acknowledge the sheer scale of this breakthrough by Reform UK.
They went into these elections with the challenge of proving that they could match in votes what the opinion polls had suggested they could.
They comfortably exceeded that high expectation which is why this is a profound moment in our contemporary politics.
Senior Reform figures believe the primary driving motivation behind their surge was that most powerful of human emotions: betrayal.
The Guardian followed the BBC’s cue, finding four Harry stories to lead with on Saturday May 3rd:
Reform’s wins were covered below but only by dismissing Nigel Farage’s suggestion that this is the “beginning of the end” for the Tories as no more than a claim, while the party was labelled “hard right” – the latter of course being a clear attempt to position Reform as a borderline fascist organisation in the eyes of its readers who no doubt spent the morning hungrily devouring the Prince Harry copy first.
The Mail was no better, running with the “sad and sorry saga” of Harry’s BBC interview as its top story. So did the Sun with ‘Harry’s Lost It‘.
Even the Times decided Saturday morning readers would be more interested in the Sussex saga:
This must have delighted the BBC newsrooms since their remit is invariably to set the news agenda for the day.
Conversely, the Telegraph grasped the moment with its top story about the six votes that shook politics (Prince Harry was pushed down the page to where he belonged):
Nigel Farage has declared the end of two-party politics after Reform secured the greatest ever local election result for an outsider party.
Reform UK has had the “Labour Party for lunch” and “wiped out” the Conservatives in parts of England, he said, after delivering a heavy defeat to the mainstream parties.
The party has taken control of 10 local councils, winning hundreds of seats across localities from Durham to Kent and toppling a 14,000-strong Labour majority in a parliamentary by-election.
Mr Farage vowed to use his party’s newfound foothold in local government to close hotels housing asylum-seekers and cut public spending in a similar approach to Elon Musk, the tech billionaire, and his DOGE department in the US.
Sir Keir Starmer told voters “we get it” as he vowed to move faster with Government delivery, while Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, issued a public apology.
Sir Keir Starmer is widely quoted as saying yesterday “I get it”. But does the BBC and some of its slavish cohorts among the print media? It seems not.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
So once again, ”Worth reading in full” leads us to a paywall. Why does DS continue to do this when there’s a non-paywalled version of the same story available?
Anyhoo, seems that Khant has just recruited some of the Jew-hating Hamasshole yobs, going by the pictures. That’s my bet anyway. They have the exact same demeanour too. Well they do make up his voter base so he wouldn’t have to look very hard would he?
”TfL said the security guards wore plain, dark clothes while on the job and were also allowed to wear hats.
It refused to comment on the guards wearing balaclavas and masks but said the use of mobile camera vans will be reviewed continually to ensure the Ulez was being enforced effectively.
A TfL spokesperson said: ‘Our security workers are directed not to wear face coverings unless they feel threatened by being closely filmed.
‘Wearing of medical masks is permitted. We will remind our contractors of the situations when they can be worn.
They added: ‘We have hired a small number of qualified security staff who are suitably licensed by the Security Industry Authority, due to ongoing criminal damage to Ulez cameras and vehicles.
‘They are held to high standards of professionalism.
‘Unfortunately, our contractors have been subjected to threats and abuse while carrying out their duties so they are advised to record any issues on body-worn cameras to deescalate conflict and if necessary, record evidence for police investigations.
‘Vandalism is unacceptable and all incidents on our network are reported to the police for investigation.
‘Criminal damage to Ulez cameras or vehicles puts the perpetrators at risk of prosecution and injury, while simultaneously risking the safety of the public.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12868309/The-ULEZ-goon-squad-Sadiq-Khan-using-mob-masked-heavies-intimidate-harass-London-homeowners-protect-hated-cameras-Blade-Runners.html
The way to get around paywalls, Mogs…https://archive.is/
Cheers, Aethelred. 🙂 Just narks me a bit why we can’t just use a source that already exists sans paywall really…
When it became bloody obvious that the dinghy imports were young fighting age men I repeatedly made the point that they were being brought in as an alternative army. I see no reason to change that opinion.
But wouldn’t we have heard something more definitive about that if it were the case by now? There’s no doubting that they’re all young men and juvenile males arriving, but if there were some sort of clandestine operation taking place, surely some information would have leaked or there’d be some eye witness accounts somewhere, but all we really have to go on presently are rumours and guesswork. I know you mentioned John O’Looney ages back but I’ve not heard anything from him in a long while. I’m not saying it’s not a possibility but we need something more to go on than just theories.
If all of these young guys were being trained up for something it’d all have to be being done in top secret, right under our noses, and these men wouldn’t have the opportunity to be going out and committing the crimes they do, and we have the evidence for this. This would also be an ideal opportunity for some secret intel to be leaked; if one of them committed a crime and it came out that he was here as part of some government initiative to be trained up for some operation. But with the lack of anything much to go on it just doesn’t really stack up for me.
I think they’re simply here as our replacements and the idea is, the men/boys do the arduous journey to get a foot in the door and set up here then they apply for family reunification, then shed-loads of relatives come over. The whole ‘asylum seeker’ farce is nothing but a Trojan horse. So whether your theory is true or not, either way our governments are screwing us over, whichever way you look at it.
Your point of view is more than plausible Mogs. I still see malicious intent behind the import of the dinghy hordes.
“security were held to high standards of professionalism, and had been told they should hide their face only if they feel intimidated by being closely filmed.”
Ah, so “high-standard” “professional” security are so easily intimidated that they don’t like close-ups from a camera. Hmm. Nothing to hide, obviously.
My feeling is that, with the sole exception of the Bladerunners, whenever anybody dons a mask they turn into an absolute arsehole. Yes, ‘bare-cheeked’ arseholes are still ten a penny, but there’s something about the transformation that takes place in a person’s character that emboldens them to behave in a seriously anti-social and hostile manner. The evidence of this is all over the internet, in footage on social media, for all to see. I have literally yet to see, during any type of protest or crowd gathering, people on the *right* side ( that’d be the decent, reasonable folk ) wearing masks. No matter the context it is always the screaming banshee, aggressive lunatics that get up to no good and in people’s faces who wear a face covering. We need the input of Dr Sidley on this observation, STAT! 😮
If I see men, especially young men, anywhere near me, individually or in a group, and their faces are covered in some way, I consider my options and expect trouble.
Well that’s it. 1) They’re mentally ill, or 2) They’re up to no good. That’s my thought process anyway. Fortunately I’m seeing zero masktards round my way.
Ditto.
They either have something to hide, or are about to something they should not be doing, or they are trying to look hard and may be easily triggered.
Or they could be feeling intimidated, since that seems to be an acceptable reason for hiding one’s face according to the Mayor of London 😉
Leaving these “security guards” aside, if someone feels intimidated on the street and wears a mask it tells me they are possibly edgy and likely to kick off – steer clear.
Well, Khan’s performance when being held to account for his actions and their outcomes particularly his refusal to answer questions do not exactly inspire confidence in his motives or agenda.
A dump but an important one – the culling of the elderly in 2020. Paul Weston calls this mass murder. I might have used the same words myself occasionally.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/a-beginners-guide-to-the-great-covid-con-part-3-manufacturing-excess-deaths/
I recommend that everyone reads this article. It’s a very succinct account of an absolutely horrific event.
Thanks RW.
“the security were held to high standards of professionalism, and had been told they should hide their face only if they feel intimidated by being closely filmed.”
Which is tantamount to saying – “this is your excuse, ‘I felt intimidated.’
A bit like saying they can do what they want.
Who decides ‘high standards of professionalism?”
“Masked security “goons” hired to guard Sadiq Khan’s Low Emission Zone cameras have been accused of assaulting and intimidating locals.”
As the ULEZ scheme was not asked for by the citizens of London and Khan is using thugs to protect his instruments of extortion this is looking like a very clever coup.
Also assuming the picture is of one of the actual “security guards”, it’s good to see that their high professional choice of mask is a horror mask designed to frighten and convey aggression. Quite appropriate really.
All the hallmarks of a fledgling totalitarian state. Impose some rules and then use the heavy mob to enforce them.
Surely these goons can’t guard every single camera? I mean the ones they can’t ‘protect;’ will be subject to things like wear and tear, unexplained tornados, meteors, Bermuda Triangle disappearances etc. And, out of scientific interest as I certainly wouldn’t suggest it or promote such behaviour, if someone smeared an epoxy resin over the lens surface, wouldn’t that make it all blurry?
And where is the money coming from to pay for Khan’s version of the NKVD?
No doubt the funds will come from ULEZ ‘fines’.
Beria would be so proud!
This is going down. Doesn’t make me happy because the world after won’t be any better than the world before but at least there is some resistance.
“…claims a security guard purposefully ran her over…”
‘deliberately’ or ‘on purpose’ – not “purposefully” (which means something quite different, although likely to be true of these fascist bastards)
The thing to do here is simply call 999. These are not proper licenced security people, they are threatening thugs. This is a criminal offence, and if Khan has hired them he should be in court. Security people are not allowed to hide their identity, in fact they have their license on the arm, if not they are thugs.
Oh if only that would work. The police if they arrived, would start on the locals. Thats where we are now. There will ultimately be a more ‘vigorous’ response to this stasi reincarnation.
Drip, drip, drip. I fear we may actually be on the verge of true anarchy.
The signs are there.
There will ultimately be a more ‘vigorous’ response to this stasi revival.
What then? Escalation becomes inevitable as more and more of the general population see and feel the effects of ALL the multi faceted crocks of sh1t surrounding them.
They will become more…’enthused’ and more inclined to start looking out for their own best interests.
How did that go with the original incarnation of the Stasi?
All part of much bigger malfeasant plan?
Are ‘they’ awakening a sleeping giant?
I know what I think.
Time will tell.
Employing mercenaries. I see the war is advancing towards the shooting stage.