Follow by Email

Sunday, 27 November 2016

The sofa needs different occupants.

Christina Patterson and Mathew Sayed. Patronising and arrogant paper previewers who are very much at home on the Sky News sofa. 













Every evening at 10:30pm and again at 11:30 pm Sky News have their preview of the following days papers. There are some "reviewers" seated on the sofa, who actually have sensible and enlightening views or comments to offer on the news on the front pages of tomorrows pages. However, there are other "reviewers" who only ever come across as patronising, arrogant and clearly lacking in any knowledge of the subject upon which they are offering an opinion. Last night's (Saturday) occupants of the sofa were no exception. Arrogant reviewer in chief was the odious Christina Patterson who shared the sofa with Mathew Sayed as they reviewed, amongst other stories, the story covering the death of Fidel Castro. 

Image result for bay of pigs failure
Bay of Pigs. Invasion collapses
Without once referring to free health care, free education, improved living standards for the people of Cuba or the crippling sanctions and embargoes imposed on Cuba over the last 50 years Patterson especially managed to demonstrate a complete ignorance of the subject particularly when she confused the botched and abortive "Bay of Pigs" invasion of 1961 with the "Cuban missile crisis" of October 1962 describing the Bay of Pigs as the greatest threat of nuclear war the world has ever seen. She did not even mention the Cuban missile crisis, which leads me to the view that she has probably never even heard of it. 







Debate on the Cuban Missile Crisis at the United Nations on 25 October 1962. During the meeting, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Adlai Stevenson confronted Soviet ambassador Valerian Zorin about the presence of Soviet missiles in Cuba.
Debate on the Cuban Missile Crisis at the U N on 25 October 1962

I reiterate my plea to Sky News, that they at least try to invite reviewers onto the sofa who have some knowledge of their subject, are not arrogant and patronising and are able to offer balance rather than bias in their opinions.