It's been obvious for a while that Kuenssberg's pro-Tory agenda goes way beyond what is acceptable in a publicly owned broadcaster. She should have lost her job ages ago when it was found that she had faked the interview with Corbyn regarding the "shoot to kill" policy, where she spliced in a different question to an answer he gave. If the BBC had a pro-Labour political editor the written press would be outraged beyond belief, but it's apparently OK for Kuenssberg to carry in the way she does.
She isn't pro-Tory. She is out to bury anyone and develop this intriguing vast "house of cards according to Kuennsberg" scenario because she thinks she is the star and not there to report the news. Every single segment she does reports on everybody as if she is the all seeing I. Can;t stand the woman beaming, grinning as if she is the great informer.
Much prefer people like Norman Smith or Chris Mason who just deliver the news and "what they've heard" instead of then developing vast storylines with her ending with a summary of what we should make of her Narnia version.
The worst is that the BBC love her and like everything else in the world these days (especially politics) people repeat. In her case her colleagues pick up on her storyline and start repeating things she has "deduced" and she drives narratives.
When she asks a question whether it be Tory, Labour or even Trump it is a rhetorical question. She is giving her opinion in the question to plant the seed to report on and is not needing an answer. Her opinion is all that matters. Hate her with a vengeance
Chris Mason is much better. Great sense of humour, reports what happens and rather than tell you what something means (as in a personal interpretation) he will give a couple of alternatives of what it could mean with a heavy caveat that he is just conjecturing.
And of course Professor John Curtice who I love. Makes me think of Professor Brainstawm from books I used to read and he only deals with facts but again he gives alternatives rather than a singular interpretation presented as fact.
This is probably why Curtice gets much closer in his predictions. He doesn't go in with a pre-conceived idea that he knows what people think whereas Kellner and most of the other pollsters think they can second guess anything and thus end up miles away.
I wish Kuennsberg would go back to ITV news where she can spout her premunitions to her heart's content while I don't watch. Much preferred Peston. At least that Doom and Gloom was the order of the day with him. Well.................. He knew how to fill 10 minutes with very little content without inventing stuff.
Sp--e--ak.........v-er---y.....................sl-ow-ly
