Can we put the BNP into context? According to the Guardian, it has 11,811 members. This is less than the circulation of Cage & Aviary Birds magazine, and less than Huddersfield Town’s average attendance this season. It’s barely half the membership of the Bakers, Food & Allied Workers’ Union, and only one-seventh the number of adults who are boy scout leaders.
Looking at the numbers, the BNP is a mere spot on the hairy arse of the body politic.
So why does it get so much attention? The BBC’s justification for putting Nick Griffin onto Question Time is that it should devote airtime to parties in part on the basis of their electoral support, and the BNP got 6.2% of the vote in the last European elections.
This, though, is obvious nonsense. Almost two-thirds of voters abstained in those elections, and even in the 2005 general election, almost two-fifth didn’t vote. The biggest electoral force is the “none of the above” party.
And yet the BBC ignores this. If it were serious about allocating airtime according to electoral support, then every edition of Question Time would have two panellists who were antipathetic (or apathetic) to all the parties. But it doesn’t. Of course, NOTA opinion is hugely diverse – but the BBC pretty much neglects every strand of it.
So, let’s be clear. It’s not getting Griffin onto Question Time because the BNP are a significant force. It’s doing so for the same reason that the skirts on Strictly Come Dancing are getting shorter – AS AN ATTEMPT TO PROP UP THE RATINGS FOR AN AILING SHOW.
Posted by cerebralperson1 
