Bearing in mind its own involvement, why was the BBC one of the media organisations not to mention the recent pandagate furore? Look on BBC web pages and you'll find nothing about the widespread anger.

Meanwhile hacks have lined up to make light of the whole issue. Richard Littlejohn, for example, simply couldn't resist a dig at women, especially if there's an opportunity to add in a bit of homophobia at the same time.

Women's groups recently provided evidence to the Leveson Inquiry about the harm done by the media. If you saw the BBC News channel reporting of the Royal Family's arrival at church at Christmas you would have noticed the emphasis on fashion and clothes worn by female members of the entourage.

Jeremy Paxman, Andrew Marr and others haven't always been too kind about blogs and bloggers. But, in reality, we frequently do a good job in holding big media organisations to account.

Without proper scrutiny, to give another instance, the BBC Press Office tweet about pandagate (see previous blog) might, at first sight, have seemed reasonable. There was, they said "Benson the carp on the 2009 male list." But the Corporation only needs read its own Magazine to know that the male "face" of August 2009 was, in fact, female.