From Money Control, yesterday:
‘US oil prices hit their highest level since November 2014 on Tuesday and Brent crude was also near a four-year peak reached the previous day, with markets preparing for tighter supply once US sanctions against Iran kick in next month. US West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude futures marked $75.90 a barrel around 0630 GMT on Tuesday, their strongest since November 2014. WTI has risen around 18 percent since mid-August. International benchmark Brent crude oil futures were at $85.28 per barrel, up 30 cents, or 0.4 percent, from their last close. That was not far off the $85.45 peak reached in the previous session, the highest since November 2014. Brent has risen by more than 20 percent from its most recent lows in August.’
For a reminder of how little we will benefit from this until we get independence and how our Nomedia will do its best to hide the possible wealth so that we don’t, see:
Scotland’s Oil surging bullishly toward $100 per barrel
As Scottish oil heads for $100pb will the UK Treasury tax this massive revenue?
‘Scottish oil and gas sales saw an 18.2% increase to £20billion in the last financial year.’ but we get diddley!
High oil prices continue to weaken confidence in Scottish economy
This is off topic but as I read the articles every day and see the not reported good news for Scotland there is a question I’d like to ask. IndyRef2 had an article: BBC dismisses complaint over Jenny Marra NHS-payout ‘fake news’.
Every complaint put into the BBC results in a similar response. The question that came to mind was how many times has the BBC reported the news quoting what the Scottish Government has done rather than print a criticism with the Scottish Government reply as secondary?
It seems to me the BBC never gives a SG action as positive and make that the story.
I wondered if you still keep data on headlines and the lead in a story?
A news provider who only gives a negative and rarely gives a positive as the lead is a complete failure or totally corrupt.
One thing that came from the IndyRef2 story was that Jenny Marra was cited as a senior member of the Audit Committee so her comment warranted the lead, however if that is her position when she put out a lie then that makes her unfit for that position.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I did just that in 2014. They said that’s just what journalism is!
Is it time to change ‘what journalism is’?
The BBC doesn’t, or shouldn’t, operate under normal journalism rules, it has a charter, where they claim to be fair and unbiased. They are unfair, and are biased, and they present their reporting based on that bias. People still believe their reporting in good faith. The BBC need to admit their biases, that’s all, we can’t make them report fairly, but they need to stop pretending they are giving a balanced view.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This post attracting nearly 7 000 hits in contrast with average of c1 000.