(from Blithering Bunny)
The Campaign for a Euroskeptic TV Series
It’s time Euroskeptics united to demand that the BBC provide them with a series – or at least a one-hour show – where they can put forward their view with sufficient time. And I don’t mean on BBC News 24, I mean on BBC1 or at least BBC2.
It can’t be denied that this is a hugely important issue, and as the BBC is the national broadcaster, it only seems fair that it gives this issue a fair and detailed hearing – the usual two-minute debates are simply inadequate.
Of course, in the interests of balance, Europhiles should also get their own series, or show. (Maybe we’ll finally get an attempt at an argument for why the EU is a good thing, although I’m not holding my breath).
We also need to demand that we don’t get palmed off with some dubious official spokesman. What is required is people like Richard North and Christopher Booker, who know the issues well and have gathered much grass-roots support over the years.
Let me know in comments whether you support this demand.
I support it.
Me too; it would be hilarious.
Good idea, gets my support.
What, do you really think that the BBC will allocate taxpayers money to a programme that doesn’t fit with the BBC’s political agenda? Come now!!
I’m probably a Europhile in the context of the readership of this site and I wholeheartedly support it.
I may even be pro- Europe, but debate cannot hurt?
Off topic:
Just saw this piece by Michael Gove. Saw him on BBC News 24, where he was outnumbered by lefties (as usual), but he was putting up a good show. He is standing for election as a tory. Hope he gets in!
“A beacon is lit in Iraq. But not in your names, Robin, Douglas and the BBC”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1055-1465108,00.html
I support it, but agree with Mr Free Market
Solidarity comrades! Seriously, I’ll be happy to put my name to it. Don’t know about my address though, they may figure out I’ve never had a tv licence.
Lee – thanks for the link and a great response from Michael Gove, not in their names indeed. His article does beg the question; on Sunday while Iraqis were lining up to vote, just where were Robin, Menzies, Fisk, Galloway and their pals?
“Europhiles should also get their own series, or show.”
Dude, it’s called ‘The BBC’.
Sounds good to me…
Off topic
– Just remembered what Michael Gove said on BBC 24. He said that he thought George Bush and Tony Blair should get the Nobel Peace prize for the Liberation of Iraq (this was about 4 months ago). It was that Sunday morning format with the usual suspects.
I seem to recall it caused a bit of a debate, particularly with that chap who writes for one of an arab newspaper.
Last time I saw anything interesting on the BBC.
Excellent idea. Best of all, the Beeb have done it before – well, 33 years ago. It staged an extended TV debate, pro and con, before the vote(???) on the accession treaty. The exchange was good enough to turn me from pro to con. Thanks BBC. Do it again!
Yes, I support it. Very much so. Excellent idea.
More generally, this is about balance and it would only be a start. Let us have similar on other contentious issues the BBC treats in a very one-sided way. What about a program on the astonishing asymmetry in treatment of the Steven Lawrence case and that of the young white lad in Glasgow, brutally murdered by Asians(muslims?). See – I can’t even remember his name. Just another symptom of BBC bias. Yes, my forgetfulness in comparison to that of the Lawrence case is due, at least in part, to the BBC. There are quite a few other cases too.
Same goes for crime, immigration/asylum and enforced multi-culturalism.
What about a programme on what democracy/democratic means? There’s more to it than giving everyone a vote and majority rule but you wouldn’t think so by the way the term is lazily thrown around.
Another on the UN, and on the ludicrous notion that there is such a thing as international law – as if it had the same moral
…basis as national law.
One on human nature – with particular reference to evoltionary pschology and the nonsense of a ‘blank slate’. Don’t mention IQ though – too much reality all in one go. BTW, why IS Africa a basket case?
Left bias at unversities.
Kris Donald. His name was Kris Donald.
I support the idea.
Good idea. And how about ditching regional news and giving England its own national news like they are planning to in Scotland.
Why does the BBC use that loony Arab editor so often ? The one with the crazy eyes, always frothing at the mouth, and ALWAYS anti-US. Are there not any other Arab papers or commentators ?
On the other hand – maybe they should keep him on, he is such an obvious moonbat.
It is an excellent idea. But isn’t it depressing that we all have to assume that it wouldn’t so much as cross the mind of the average BBC employee that a programme that reflected the views of the majority of its audience should occasionally be aired? If it did happen you can bet that it would either have to be chaired by a BBC stalwart who could shout down the particpants and change the subject every time an inconvenient point is being made, or else the opportunity to critise Europe would be given to some ruddy-faced retired colonel in order to demonstrate that anyone who questions the sense of the European project is blustering pop-eyed buffoon.
I think this is a principle that could properly be applied to many more issues than the EU.
The system of adversarial debates has a long history in government & adversrial court procedure is even more to be respected.
A large part of the cheapening of politics can be laid at the fact that everything has to be defineable in a 10 second sound bite.
Either giving each side an hour to make their own programme or running a court procedure with the journalists as referees rather than players would be well worth doing. This is as much a criticism of the other media as of the BBC.
Wouldn’t work 100% – There is still the question of what are the 2 sides to the official debate. During the Yugoslav War the BBC carefully limited debate to the 2 sides – should we bomb cities to help those nice KLA non-terrorists or alternately should we launch a ground invasion to help the nice fellows. Hopefully any debate on the EU will be on more balanced choices.
excellent idea.
Works for me. But it would never happen.
I agree entirely. As an aside I was reminded of a report some years ago on a local BBC radio that described a shoppper who stated a preference for English Apples as a ‘europhobe’. Just adds it up.
“Why does the BBC use that loony Arab editor so often ? The one with the crazy eyes”
LOL
The BBC cannot accept that others have different or more information, or even experience, on a subject than itself.Or that people will reluctantly hold a contrary opinion to the BBCs aproved one but wish it were otherwise.Multiculturism is an example.I dont think its a 100% success,but I do not wish ill on others of a different culture.
John Archer
– What about a program on the astonishing asymmetry in treatment of the Steven Lawrence case and that of the young white lad in Glasgow, brutally murdered by Asians(muslims?). See – I can’t even remember his name. Just another symptom of BBC bias. –
In firing off your moralistic splattergun, you’ve got yourself all confused… It was the Daily Mail that is to blame for the Lawrence one, I’m afraid. Everyone else hyped it up much later.
But could I just put my twopenn’orth in? I would support such a proposed TV show. But only if you were on it, John…
“enforced multi-culturalism….the ludicrous notion that there is such a thing as international law…Don’t mention IQ though – too much reality all in one go. BTW, why IS Africa a basket case?”. Superb.
Jarndyce
Could you please clarify what you are talking about?
Lee,
Jarndyce is talking about the Bell Curve which purports to show that the IQs of racial groups differ with Orientals and Hassidic Jews at the top and Africans (black) at the bottom. It’s controversial for obvious reasons. I consider that the IQ only measures a small portion of mental capacity but it’s the vital component which enables one to comprehend technical and mathematical concepts of the kind which underpin industrial economies. For example, a plumber or an electrician are not simply lowly tradesmen – they have IQs higher than average (100). For the unsung engineers and scientists in industry, the margin is significantly higher. If the Bell Curve theory is correct, it means that Africa can never industrialise but China and India will. We’ll know for sure in twenty years.
I’ve never read the Bell Curve but I’m rather suspicious of its findings. I suspect Africa’s problems have more to do with their tribal culture than IQ. How smart was the average Celtic tribesman in the Iron Age?
Culture,not race,makes us different.If you are a white middle class Briton you have more in common with a black middle American than a Roumanian.
Sorry, can I just clarify: I was joking. The Bell Curve is total bollocks, an insane theory, pure intellectual charlatanism.
There you go – too much reality all in one go and see what happens. So natural selection works on everything but the human brain? Presumably, it has been precisely molded by the fairies to conform to a fairy-tale world. Yes, that must be it.
Why don’t we put such a show together and sell it to Sky or some other private channel. Then the BBC would be forced to copy it so as to compete.
There is almost certainly something to John Archer’s implicit assertions of racial difference and it doesn’t just pertain to the narrow intelligence band of IQ but other aspects which we all see every day. The top sprinters and basketball players are almost exclusively black – chance? On a spelling contest for adolescents shown on UK TV, the two finalists were girls of Indian lineage – accident? China and India are achieving phenomenal economic growth driven by industry – luck? All of black Africa (the developing world?)remains stagnant and is even regressing – the West’s fault? The glib phrase that a nation’s main resource is its people appears to be fact.
Good idea Serf.
I don’t think a channel driven purely by viewing figures would snap up deeply political argument.
Maybe if it was packaged as ‘Top 100 reasons to hate the French and Germans’ or ‘Britains scariest red faced blustering ranters’.
Allan: My guess is that there is something to this, for the reasons you gave. But I don’t know. I’m a layman. What I do know though is that the IQ topic has attracted a lot of heated debate or, more accurately, a suppressed but heated debate. From what I’ve read, rather than addressing the contended facts, the arguments against seem to be highly emotional and politically motivated more than anything else, with the researchers in the area being severely hounded by left-wing/marxist academics and students, most of whom seem to be laymen themselves. That does arouse one’s suspicions. It aroused mine. On that evidence alone one could be forgiven for thinking there is something to it, something that can’t be dismissed in open debate. Something unappealing to the BBC’s utopian instincts? I reckon. That and Darwin, of course.
Heck Yes – I support the idea. It would be disastrous for Britain and Europe, if Britain did not get a fair balance of views on the EU on the BBC, before voting in any referendum on the Euro and the EU constitution.