Why Kirsty Wark should not have made a documentary about Alex Salmond.

Is this shot dark enough, Kirsty?

In addition to the obvious barrier presented by Wark’s longstanding and personal links to the Labour Party, in its ‘New’ form of course, that we saw leaked into the public domain after First Minister Jack McConnell holidayed with her twice, in 2003 and 2005: (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/jan/07/politicsandthemedia.politics), she has a long and dark history of naked hostility toward him manifest in interviews for the BBC.

In 2014, impolite, disrespectful, unprepared, arrogant, dismissive, angry, shouting, interrupting repeatedly as she defended Tony Blair against Salmond’s calm legal criticism:

There was an earlier example even more bad-tempered, in 2007, but it seems to have gone. Still available, however, are the 186 complaints in this archive: https://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/06/that_salmond_interview.html

I think the programme may also be directed by Wark’s wife but I cannot be sure of that. If it’s true, it is inappropriate.

17 thoughts on “Why Kirsty Wark should not have made a documentary about Alex Salmond.”

  3. Clements is the MD of the production company, and is presumably “not personally involved” in the programme.

    Like

    Reply

  4. Kirsty Wark should not be presenting any programme about Alex Salmond, she is far far too biased, it’s wholly inappropriate and unprofessional to say the very least. We are certainly in a different realm when the state BritNat broadcaster can demonise, harass and defame an innocent man using this form of media, or any for that matter.
    When state broadcaster acts as judge and jury, we are in very very dangerous waters indeed.

    Trial by television and those in power must surely be the most sure sign of a dangerous, and ever increasing fascist regime, where there is no effective system of real law and justice. Scary times.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  6. All this about AS but all very quite about the ex minister Tory MP accused of sexual behaviour and allowed to go back to the HOC in two weeks.Who is he, I would have thought BBC would be searching for his name ,oh forgot he is a Tory.

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

  8. Birdy woman was just as bad but she flew the nest with a big fat worm.
    I think people in Scotland are turning and many have already turned so the hatchet could backfire spectacularly

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  9. And not content with Wark’s effort (no doubt featuring Garavelli) , BBC Radio 4 is giving Garavelli a platform on the following evening to revisit her sympathetic press treatment of the alphabet sisters, and, apparently, to reflect on how she too has become a “target”. Don’t all sob at once. This would be quite bad enough following a not guilty verdict, but the fact that it happens when there’s a live enquiry and pending contempt actions makes it outrageous.

    Liked by 7 people

    Reply

    1. ‘Target’ of what or who I wonder?

      Anyone making false allegations of assault, or rape, or any crime, is a disgrace because it completely undermines those who really are ‘victims’ of such terrible crimes. It does women in particular a massive disservice if some are willing to act as victim, if they are really not.

      I had a college friend who was the victim of a violent rape, life long damage. I was sexually assaulted a couple of years back in the street, and I also know of at least one young male who was falsely accused of rape, it almost ruined his life. Some do that apparently for the compensation, ie for money, terrible.

      It will be interesting to hear about this TV programme, and how it is perceived, and what is said etc. If there is any chance it is just being put forward as merely a smear campaign, it should be pulled pronto, but it won’t be.

      Given the verdict at the court re; A. Salmond, to suggest that it was anything less than above board,
      attempts to undermine Scotland’s long established and much respected justice system.

      What is their actual agenda? I so hope they do not play victim if it’s false, because to do so, damages the justice system and any protection of real victims of terrible crimes.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  10. Since two people are currently awaiting trial for allegedly revealing information in features they wrote which allow ‘jigsaw identification’ of at least one of the women involved, can we be assured that the law officers will examine this closely for evidence of possible ‘jigsaw identification’?

    Mr Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland claimed some time ago, that other articles enabled him to ‘jigsaw identify’ at least one of the women. He submitted his evidence to the Lord Advocate, but there has been no other person charged.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. … Who has given him the run around and sent him from one department to another, in ever decreasing circles. But give him his due, he continues to send his letters seeking answers. No one in the Crown Prosecutor’s Office wants to be the one to say they know the Media, Garavelli in particular, have been negligent & have given the names away but they don’t want to prosecute HER. Wishing only to prosecute those they see as enemies of their plans & careers.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

    2. … Who has given him the run around and sent him from one department to another, in ever decreasing circles. But give him his due, he continues to send his letters seeking answers. No one in the Crown Prosecutor’s Office wants to be the one to say they know the Media, Garavelli in particular, have been negligent & have given the names away but they don’t want to prosecute HER. Wishing only to prosecute those they see as enemies of their plans & careers.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.