Please use this thread for off-topic, but preferably BBC related, comments. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments – our aim is to maintain order and clarity on the topic-specific threads. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.
Open thread – for comments of general Biased BBC interest:
Bookmark the permalink.
Moore blames women for ‘banal’ TV
British TV standards are deteriorating because the BBC is “run by women”, astronomer Sir Patrick Moore has said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6634255.stm
He’s right of course.
My last post for a while as I’m off to Canada.
Glad to see jr back and earning his retainer from the BBC by being daft as usual.
And who is this weirdo korova? I’m amazed that you guys indulge him.
Robbiekeane…. been a bit busy lately so haven’t had a chance to discuss futher your proposition in the thread further down that EU munificence brought about the NI settlement. Will carry on with that on my return.
My last post for a while as I’m off to Canada.
TPO | 08.05.07 – 2:07 pm
Safe journey and good luck!
Hey TPO, best of luck. Think you’re slightly overexaggerating my case but no worries.
HYS comments from yours truly that the BBC declined to publish:
Number 1.
“On a day when a Cambridge undergraduate has had to go into hiding in fear of his life for publishing anti-religious satire (lampooning the Islamic prophet), then I think it is definitely time to stop apologising. And for the BBC to starrt asking a few searching questions of the right people, rather than constantly undermining this country.”
Number 2.
“The Pope has exercised his freedom of speech. Muslim leaders have exercised their freedom of speech. I now exercise mine: The patience of the UK public is being severely tested by the hypocritical whining by muslim leaders and spokesMEN (self appointed no doubt).”
Number 3.
“What should the muslim community be doing to root out radical elements in their community?” A lot more than now. Stopping the denial and admitting there is a real problem would be a good start. Next, stop projecting blame onto foreign policy, or Bush, or Blair, or Jews. Who kills more muslims in the Middle East than anybody else – why, radical muslims of course.”
Number 4.
“If I need to know what is going on in the Middle East, I rarely read the BBC website. Their tiresome anti-Israel agenda just wears me down. And the Fergal Keane/Jeremy Bowen approach of clambering through ruins in southern Lebanon to find a teddy bear to highlight just how bad the Israelis are is, frankly, obscene. More accurate reporting of the facts is often found on blogs.”
Thankyou BBC, and how much do I pay you in licence fees each year?
Bio/Robbie
Thanks.
It’s only a two week recce. Will be back before the end of the month.
Keep an eye out for me please to see if my post above (Patrick Moore’s comments) provokes a feminist backlash.
Further ammo for the debate on the BBC demonising Sarkozy.
BBC Ceefax files was headed, ‘Profile: Divisive Figure Sarkozy.
jr still in denial, bless.
Must sign off now… bye
On the non-extortion funded network called Sky there are channels for Men and Channels for women.
Missing words game
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6635669.stm
As well as whitewashing the realities of Iraqi Jewish history, the reporter’s ignorance was shown up by the fact that s/he did not appear to know that Hidekel = Tigris.
John Reith, can you please get your friends at HYS to resolve these technical difficulties?
Bryan | 08.05.07 – 10:01 am |
Gone a bit quiet out there on the Reithian front, hasn’t it?
Re. AntiCitizenOne | Homepage | 08.05.07 – 3:10 pm
Associated Press:
Six men described by federal prosecutors as “Islamic militants” were arrested on charges they plotted to attack the Fort Dix Army base and “kill as many soldiers as possible,” authorities said Tuesday.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/F/FORT_DIX_PLOT?SITE=AZTUS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Reuters:
Six suspected Islamic radicals have been arrested on allegations of plotting an attack on New Jersey’s Fort Dix army installation with the aim of killing as many soldiers as possible, officials said on Tuesday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0843572720070508?src=050807_0936_DOUBLEFEATURE_
BBC:
Six right-wing plumbers have been arrested on charges of plotting to attack Fort Dix army base in the US state of New Jersey.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6635669.stm
MIGRANT PLAN ‘A DISASTER’
See comments at the bottom of page
http://www.express.co.uk/news/view/6464
Car bomb explodes in Iraqi city ”
The title makes me to think that A car bomb is actually a Volcano and it exploded killing 16 people.
Funny BBC Journos
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6633911.stm
On the non-extortion funded network called Sky
What is the punishment for accessing Sky without paying a subscription?
> What is the punishment for accessing Sky without paying a subscription?
You can read the signal all you want for free.
http://www.freesatfromsky.co.uk/
However it’s illegal to decrypt the signal without permission.
Well, free if you don’t include the tax we pay on the products we buy that goes to fund all commercial networks. Wonder what the punishment is for decrypting without permission.
korova:
A simple question for you:
“Do you think the Car Bomb that is exploded in Iraq is an act of Americans/British/Infidel Westerners? ”
Yes/No is Ok
relevance to current point=0
Can anyone tell me how to complain to Sky about a story? It seems fairly straight forward to complain to the BBC when they make stupid mistakes, less so with Sky.
A “pointless war”…What is pointless about freeing the Iraqi people from tyranny? Saddam murdered a million of his own people who are still being dug up from his mass graves and he waged war on his neighbours.
Let us not forget that Britain has twice been in a similar situation and had to be rescued fortunately America came and rescued us from that other tyrant Adolph Hitler..
Father of soldier killed in Iraq says: ‘I could strangle Tony Blair’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=453351&in_page_id=1770&ICO=NEWS&ICL=TOPART
Korova, with regard to extortion or otherwise from Murdochvision. I have a choice whether I take Sky, if I don’t subscribe I don’t have to pay. I have no choice but to pay for the BBC whether I watch it or not – Thats extortion, Sky works in a free market.
The BBC has now updated its Fort Dix report to include this:
Four of the men were born in the former Yugoslavia, one in Jordan and one in Turkey, a spokesman said. He described the suspects as “Islamic radicals”.
To a certain extent you do have a point. However, Sky draws most of its revenue from advertising and, therefore, whether you subscribe or not, you pay for Sky.
Anonymous | 08.05.07 – 4:25 pm
“Saddam murdered a million of his own people who are still being dug up from his mass graves”
57 pages of Farthers, Mothers and children
http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/
Korova, I only ‘pay’ for the advertising if I choose to purchase the advertised goods – Once again my choice.
But practically every product is advertised. So every product you buy contributes to Sky.
Korova, Not every product is advertised on Sky TV.
Challenge to all western politicians.
Name me one country in which Muslims are living in peaceful coexistence with their neghbors?
Report: “Six men face terror charges in plot to attack N.J. army base
Six men have been charged with plotting to attack a military base in New Jersey, according to WNBC-TV.
The men, described as “Islamic radicals,” planned to use AK-47s to attack soldiers at Fort Dix, a military installation south of New York City, according to the report”.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/05/report_six_isla.html
Fred:
Challenge to all western politicians.
Name me one country in which Muslims are living in peaceful coexistence with their neghbors?
My next door neighbours are Muslims and we get along just fine
Maybe not, but the point is that even though many of us do not even have Sky, most of the products we buy help to fund it. It is virtually impossible for anyone to purchase products that do not advertise on Sky.
That still gives you a lot more choice than the BBC license fee. After all, you derive benefit, sustenence and enjoyment from the products you purchase regardless of the source of their advertising campaign. I bought a Ford Focus based on its merits as a means of transport rather than on the basis of it featuring heavily on Sky Sports.
korova:
However, Sky draws most of its revenue from advertising and, therefore, whether you subscribe or not, you pay for Sky.
Tens of thousands of businesses that I don’t patronise advertise. Are you saying that I pay other than in the most diffuse way for all advertising from all companies?
What exactly are you saying?
But then, a proportion of the cost of that car would have gone to Sky. Effectively, it is a tax on the products that you buy.
I owuyld have thought that advertising makes products cheaper.
I am saying that a proportion of every product that you buy goes to the commercial networks. In effect, it is a tax on the products you purchase.
If you purchase goods or services ion a free market you dont have a right of veto on how the vendor finances its business. Its a trade off between cost and benefit. I don’t like the idea that every time I fill up the petrol tank I am funding Islamist terrorism but I need the car. I dont subscribe to Sky or particularly approve of Murdoch but a Ford represented the best deal available at the time – My choice. I get no choice at all from the BBC. Pay our telly poll tax or dont watch TV. Extortion.
But the point is that even if you do not have a television, you still fund Sky. If I ditched my TV tomorrow, I would still be funding Sky/ITV etc against my wishes and there is very little I can do about it. On the other hand, it is virtually impossible to still fund the BBC when you do not have a television (unless you still buy into their magazines etc). The choice is entirely artificial.
Korova
The extent to which you ‘fund’ Sky if you dont subscribe to their services is minimal and if you take that line of argument evry consumer is funding every major corporation whether they buy its products directly or not.
The BBC does have a choice – It can be politically impartial and we wouldn’t mind the licence fee or it can pay for advertising and pay its own way like every other broadcaster in the real world. With the exception of those state funded broadcasters in places like Cuba, North Korea…..
Companies don’t advertise their products because they think profits are looking a little too rosy and could do with a downturn. They do so because ultimately they will make more cash back than they incur through greater volume sales, hence the consumer doesn’t ‘pay’ for the advertising (unless the ad agency is doing a particularly bad job). Might even benefit if economies of scale facilitate a reduction in unit price or one has a proper job and a pension plan.
The license fee on the other hand is a straight cost and if one doesn’t watch the Beeb is indeed paying for nowt.
btw if you really wanted to and were extraordinarily anal it would be perfectly possible to boycott companies/products advertising on Sky.
Korova
I’ve made the odd complaint to Sky through their online contact forms. It’s irritating not to be able to speak to someone though. And don’t expect a response either, because I doubt you’ll get one, unless you’ve attached a solicitor’s letter.
Still, notwithstanding your arguments above, I don’t feel I’m paying a tax for Sky, so I don’t care as much about any crud they broadcast.
Saying that SKY’s advertising revenue is akin to the public trough is a false analogy. Any portion of the purchase price of a product which goes to an advertising budget is a variable, not a constant. Budgets and sales revenues change all the time, according to market forces (and sometimes legislation). Payment to the BBC coffers is entirely constant, and is enforced exclusively by law.
A car company certainly earmarks a percentage of the profit on the sale of one car for its advertising budget. If an ad for this car does appear on SKY, then yes, it can be said that if one buys the car, one is indirectly funding SKY. So don’t buy the car. Alternatively, one can wait for a fiscal quarter when that car is no longer advertised, in which case no portion of the purchase price will go to SKY.
There are plenty of products to buy which do not advertise on SKY. Which fresh fruits and vegetables do you buy which advertise on SKY? Which eggs? Which tap of your kitchen sink? Which unpasteurized Stilton? Which herbs grown in your garden or in a box on your windowsill? Which local farmer, from whom you can buy butter, meat, etc.?
Not all clothing products advertise on SKY either. Nor do all small shops, or local fishmongers or beers or tobacco products. Nor do the multitude of private individuals who sell their pre-owned cars, bicycles, furniture, etc., to other individuals.
If one really wants to, one can avoid funding SKY, even indirectly. It won’t be a lark, but what endeavor of any worth ever is?
But one cannot avoid funding the BBC unless one either breaks the law, or leaves the country.
If enough people are angry about a program or personality shown on SKY, they can boycott the advertisers (citizens of free countries do that). This has been known to cause change. The BBC, on the other hand, need not fear antagonizing those who pay for its broadcasts. Unless they can change the law, of course. At which point there is no turning back.
Almost as depressing as the thought that one is supporting collectivism when handing over money for the BBC’s TV tax, is the understanding that one is also supporting the equally loathsome Capita.
Now, people may like to call Microsoft ‘evil’…
Its getting a bit tedious now – the BBC saying “Little information has been made public, prompting concerns the police are not doing enough.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6635463.stm
They have been told time and time again that the Portuguese police cannot disclose details of the investigation as it is against their laws – yet despite this they are bandying around rumours that the police are useless.
We even have a Trevor McDonald “special” on ITV about the case – I find it very distastful – the media seem to have this gory habit now of intruding on anyones grief just for sensationalism. I feel sorry for the parents – and this junk and often cruel “journalism” must make it even worse for them.
“Moore blames women for ‘banal’ TV
Sir Patrick’s 50 years on TV earned him a place in the record books
British TV standards are deteriorating because the BBC is “run by women”, astronomer Sir Patrick Moore has said.
The Sky at Night host also described female newsreaders as “jokey” and called for separate channels to cater for the needs of the different sexes.
“I think it may eventually happen,” the 84-year-old told the Radio Times.
A BBC spokesman described Sir Patrick as being one of TV’s best-loved figures and said his “forthright” views were “what we all love about him”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6634255.stm
I bet they do
‘Islamic radicals’ charged with plot to kill Fort Dix soldiers:
Michelle has the whole story with police reports
http://michellemalkin.com/
.
Off Topic:
This is unbelievable. I missed the original broadcast (Newsround) but it is covered in this weeks ‘Newswatch’.
It really has to be seen to be believed. George Bush is repeatedly mocked on a children’s news programme in some of the most blatant propaganda since Goebbels. Of course the editor of Newsround is on hand to tell us that they were ‘laughing with him’ and ‘not at him’ (target age range of 7 to 12 years old).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6620000/newsid_6626600/6626699.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm
My post on (d)hys about special relationships:
I would have thought that the special relationship between the beeb and hamas is particularly strained at present.
I bet it doesn’t make it.
1. Spot the missing words….
“In October 2002, allegations of intelligence gathering within Stormont led to the suspension of power-sharing institutions.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6634373.stm
Perhaps the words were ‘IRA operatives working for Sinn Fein’ ?
2. Ref the Bush saga. The Ten O’Clock News with Natasha Crapalinsky, (She Who Will Never Be Awarded Journalist of the Year) and straight in there with “Bush gets a date wrong” rather than “The Queen visited the White House today.” I tell you, HM and the Prez have far better manners than the clowns at the Beeb!
3. I note that they keep repeating Victoria Wood’s wee jaunty series but for some reason won’t repeat Episode One despite several pleas to Terry Wogan on Points of View on Sunday. Wouldn’t be anything to do with the fact that it was very pro-Empire throughout that particular episode would it? Just asking as Episode 2 was a bit more anti-Empire than Epi 1 hence the reason why I wonder it was repeated whilst Epi 1 was not.
Re Fort Dix – not the first attack planned on this base. Radical left terrorist group The Weathermen wanted to bomb the place in 1970 but fortunately it all went a bit wrong. One of the Weathermen was on Radio 4 a couple of months ago, sharing sweet memories about those heady days with Jim Naughtie.
(Please remember the BBC guidelines – radical Islamists are right-wingers. They do not share the same goals as the radical left.)
4. In Scotland the BBC on BBC1 showed a film interviewing the former lover of Angelike Kulk the Polish girl raped and murdered by a scumbag let out one early release by our liberal friends. Now let me get this right – a middle aged married man shagging a teenager who then is raped and killed by a released sex offender is given airtime (was he paid I wonder?) to whinge about how he loved her etc etc yet he is back with his wife and carrying on with his life unlike the poor girl. Why on Earth was he allowed airtime and why did the BBC let him on air? They whine about the Sun but this was tabloid ‘journalism’ at its worst!
BaggieJonathan | 08.05.07 – 2:00 pm
He (Herod) was not Jewish!
He had no Jewish blood at all.
You are wrong about that.
The Idumeans were converted by Hyrcanus in 112 BCE and were thereafter Jewish.
Herod the Great rebuilt the Temple. Hardly a goyische act.
“Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea, and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and of the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews.”
See Josephus Antiquities of the Jews Book XIII Ch 9.