SUBSIDARIAT

No daft pun headline today. Just a word.

I learned of it via a Newsnight promo posting: "A new word entered the lexicon this week. The BBC was attacked by the Editor of the Daily Mail, Paul Dacre, as being part of the "subsidariat" that needs to be cut down to size. He said it's too big, its journalism starts from the premise of left wing ideology, and it's a monolith distorting Britain's media market. Mr Dacre has said no to an interview tonight. But we'll be discussing whether his criticisms of the BBC are justified. "

Needless to say it worked, and I will now be watching on the excellent back-up online download.

Whatever one may think of the Daily Mail, its editor, the BBC and its position as the most dominant force in our country's media firmament, I must say I find it an interesting word, and on balance, a worthy new one.

Because it does rather neatly sum up, and in a subtly pejorative KGB-allusional way a bunch over over-funded, monopolistic and way-too-unaccountable entities who use a lot of our money in ways that are hard to justify.

See, I can usually get it back to the environment.

ADDENDUM - Just watched, and had to comment:

I just watched last night's edition on the PC-feed, and must repeat my commendation for this facility.

However, it did allow me to witness a truly awful QED on the spot I wanted to catch, namely the Subsidiariat story.

I can see how absolute objectivity is nigh on impossible when reporting and/or discussing just about anything, but especially a criticism that is directed so close to home.

But, heavens above, the intro piece was as nasty a piece of sneering, unsubtle 'Yeah... right' (as opposed to 'Yes. Right’ - denuded of contradicting tone as a stenographer's typescript) as I have ever seen.

And hence it blew any chance of me assessing all brought up subsequently in anything but the view that this was indeed going to be addressed by a monolithic, monopolistic, massively-funded, unaccountable, trendy-liberal, never-left-privileged-uni, London-centric, in-crowd, overly-defensive medium. I have to contribute to this!!!!

Oh, and can we try and think beyond popping two extremes (or choosing one feisty and one duffer to suit the agenda in case its live and editing can't do the trick?) into the cockfight ring and feel that has adequately addressed the nuances of any reasonable debate.

Otherwise, loved the show.

ps: to those who read my blog, we’ll soon see how the moderators handle the slight dilemma this contribution may throw up. To be fair, they are a lot better here than the piece's lauded print media in this regard.