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.
Ritter | 26.06.07 – 10:09 am
It’s complicated.
The proportion of ethnic minorities nationwide is between 7 and 8 per cent.
But the BBC tends to employ people in the major cities – and most jobs are in London, where the ethnic minority population is over 25%.
So some jobs are ‘locally recruited’ – cleaners and security guards, while others are ‘nationally recruited’ – e.g. TV producers.
Then you have to consider ‘age cohorts’.
The ethnic minority population is concentrated in the younger age groups – 12% of university students, for example. Fewer retired people.
…..do all the sums and it averages out at 12.5%.
Please don`t try to chew snuff, it goes up the nose
http://www.ipcosnuff.com/creamy.htm
T | 26.06.07 – 10:26 am
Apart from the ‘BBC in thrall to Islam” meme, one of the other sustaining myths of this blog is that the BBC = Gordon’s fan club.
So as far as people here are concerned, Panorama (like the feature on ‘honour killings’ on the Today prog this morning) simply never happened.
To admit it did would be to undermine the very raison d’etre of B-BBC.
@John Reith:
You have demonstrated one of the problems that I perceive with the BBC. The BBC is paid for by licence fees. It has a different funding scheme than newspapers. It can therefore afford to do things differently. It is not Guido Fawkes, it is not Fox News, it is not the Guardian or the Daily Mail. It does not need to resort to sensationalism, opinion, comment, ridicule, partiality, celebrity culture to ensure that people cough up their hard-earned. It could just stick to the facts. There was a time when it tried to do that. When it did do that the newspapers couldn’t compete. That was why they turned to the tactics of the Sun – more sensationalist, more partial, more contraversial. Sadly the BBC has made the mistake of following the papers, despite its previously high regard by the public. It should be no suprise, therefore, that people are saying “This is just like all the other crap we are being fed, but since I don’t agree with it – WHY THE HELL DO I HAVE TO PAY FOR IT?”
6 revisions for this story? Why? You tell us it is because it was an early release. Fine. But why release an story so early it is actually grossly inaccurate and fails to represent the views of the people mentioned in the report? It is no use to anyone. It is worse than no use. And in the absence of the necessary detail did the writer restrict himself to say 10 lines? No, we get several paragraphs of cut and pasted comment.
Take this message away with you John: I really don’t care what your personal political opinions are, or the opinions of anyone else at the BBC. I just want you to act in a professional manner and report the facts. Yes, I know it is dull. State broadcasters tend to report the news in a dull manner. Not sensational, not first off the mark, but hopefully more accurate and reliable. It will serve the nation better and protect the BBC from being broken up and privatised. It would make BBC reporting “special” compared to newspaper and satellite TV reporting. People would be presented with the truth, and that is a valuable commodity.
It would be nice to see some head honchos in BBC News that have had some proper journalism training. I note that Andrew Marr and Nick Robinson seem to have gone straight into journalism after an Oxbridge education that was not related to journalism. I am expecting that if I took the trouble to look very few of the others would have come through formal training in journalism.
It would also help if the BBC dropped its London-centric view from the national news. People living in Cornwall must wonder if they are really part of the UK at all. The Scots must believe they are part of an ethnic minority outnumbered by Asians. The people of Bristol must wonder why the national news reports Bristol news from a totally different perspective than BBC West.
Always remember this maxim:
There is your truth, there is my truth and there is the truth.
Stick to reporting the facts accurately and without omission and we will be closer to the real truth.
pounce – you must have missed these bits of the report in your eageness to let us know about it:
“This is to do with misguided notions of family honour. It has nothing to do with radicalism or terrorism.”
There were a dozen such murders recorded in the UK last year although some police officers and campaigners say there may be many more.
Two weeks ago, three men were found guilty of the murder of 20-year-old Banaz Mahmod who was found in a suitcase buried in a garden in Birmingham last year.
(my emphasis)
I know you wouldn’t want to let your opinion get in the way of the text of the story.
Everybody knows that President Bush said “Yo Blair!”.
The only problem is, he didn’t.
For anyone who wants a good expose of the rigour and attention to detail (heavy sarcasm) of our modern current events reporting, go to:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/the_westminster_hour/6234940.stm
I’m not particularly a fan of Simon Hoggart, mainly because I can’t stand the back-slapping, self-congratulatory smugness of the News quiz, but the first six minutes of this programme are very interesting indeed.
Just like the recent instance with President Bush’s ‘stolen’ watch, in Albania, the media is much more interested in what they think the story is, than the reality.
The smugness and complacency of the reporters in this programme, including the BBC’s James Landale, is quite breathtaking. They are completely unapologetic, and smugly insist that, even though the story was completely untrue, it had an underlying truth.
How VERY Piers Morgan.
How are we expected to trust them on the big things, when they can’t even get the little things right.
Since everyone concerned now admits, unreservedly, that they got it completely wrong, it would be really interesting to see some kind of apology from the BBC on its news site.
Yeah, right.
http://ws.collactive.com/points/point?id=m8YpvruDOofm
DUBAI (AFP) – Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man Ayman al-Zawahiri voiced backing for Hamas in an Internet tape on Monday and warned against any offensive to wrest control of Gaza from the Islamist movement.
n the audio message, Al-Qaeda’s number two charged that Egypt and Saudi Arabia were planning to join an “offensive” against Hamas, which seized Gaza 10 days ago from the secular Fatah party of president Mahmud Abbas.
And in a dramatic change of tone, Zawahiri urged Muslim fighters to back Hamas with funds and weapons, saying it was a “religious duty.”
“Today we must support the mujahedeen (holy warriors) in Palestine, including the Hamas mujahedeen, despite all the mistakes made by their leadership,” Zawahiri said on the Al-Hasbah site often used by Al-Qaeda.
“Unite with all the mujahedeen of the world against an offensive being prepared… which the Egyptians and Saudis will join in,” he said.
Zawahiri, who in the past spoke out vehemently against the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) for joining the political process in the Palestinian territories, urged the group to amend its policies.
“We tell our brothers, the Hamas mujahedeen, that we and the entire Muslim nation stands alongside you but you must redress your (political) path,” said the man regarded as the brains of the Al-Qaeda network.
Ryan | 26.06.07 – 10:45 am
It does not need to resort to sensationalism, opinion, comment, ridicule, partiality, celebrity culture…
And most of the time, it doesn’t. A bit of sensationalism did creep in. It was stamped on. A bit of celeb-fixation crept in …research showed it wasn’t popular on the main news, so it was dropped.
…..despite its previously high regard by the public. It should be no surprise, therefore, that people are saying “This is just like all the other crap we are being fed….’….
But that’s not what they are saying. Survey after survey has shown that people value, trust and appreciate BBC News and current affairs programmes. Despite many new entrants to the news provision market, BBC news reach has held up • and some audiences have increased….e.g. Radio 4’s Today.
….it is actually grossly inaccurate and fails to represent the views of the people mentioned in the report?
It was not grossly inaccurate. It gave an account of what was said on Today by the main players. And in the press release, presumably. Not brilliant, but not that terrible.
And in the absence of the necessary detail did the writer restrict himself to say 10 lines? No, we get several paragraphs of cut and pasted comment.
Fair point. I agree.
But your complaint is about a more or less insignificant web piece that was only up for a few hours at most. The BBC is first and foremost a broadcaster. Its ‘journalism’ on this story was the Today programme item • and the series of items of which it was a part. That’s what it should be judged by.
the Scots must believe they are part of an ethnic minority outnumbered by Asians.
The Scots get plenty of their own news. They have their own ‘Newsnight’ and BBC Radio Scotland. And Scots are hardly under-represented on UK-wide network current affairs. Naughtie is a Scot. Humphrys is Welsh. Paxo is from Birmingham. Metrocentric?
The people of Bristol must wonder why the national news reports Bristol news from a totally different perspective than BBC West.
But do they? Such as? On the whole, regional items for network news come from the appropriate regional newsrooms and often have the same reporter. When that’s not the case, there is plenty of discussion and collaboration.
‘Honour’ violence ‘terror-linked’
Oh dear! If it results from Islamic terror groups then it must all be our (& the Jews) fault then.
Ryan:
6 revisions for this story? Why? You tell us it is because it was an early release. But why release an story so early it is actually grossly inaccurate and fails to represent the views of the people mentioned in the report? It is no use to anyone.
Well, no, it wasn’grossly inaccurate, nor did it fail to report people’s views. You just didn’t like the feel of it because you (wrongly) assumed it was tied to someone else’s agenda.
And, yes, it’s absolutely the norm for news stories to evolve rapidly and in public. Look at the PA or Reuters wire services. They break the initial headline and add detail as it emerges or as the specialist writers get on the case.
Look at the different editions of most good newspapers. Most significant (and lots of minor) stories change with edition. Look at the news bulletins as they engage with a running story through the day.
And, on the issue of making things definitive before you break a story, consider the reaction of last night’s poster, bodo, stroppy because the BBC weren’t (in his view) covering the Sheffield floods as fast as Sky News.
If I complain to the ASA about the misleading Beeb ads ‘we bring you breaking news as it happens’ [or simlr] then will they have to pull them?
If I complain to trading standards about BBC mis-selling, can I reclaim my license fee?
No in both cases. But…lots of people have a reasonable expectation that a professional news service will bring them developing news as fast as they can. Most users are savvy enough to check for updates on stories that really matter…
Biased BBC: Every Day I Write The Book.
John Reith
I think you protest too loudly. Just as the BBC was praised by many on these pages for it’s coverage of Nigel Calder’s theories on global warming, so is it a good thing that the BBC is addressing honour killings and running critical exposes of Gordon Brown.
I am tempted to wheel out the old saying about swallows and summers though. Like the global warming issue, honour killings have been going on for years and Wee Gordon has hardly just developed his personality defects (though I must say that I certainly don’t think BBC TV is generally too biased towards Gordon Brown, though much of the radio coverage – especially Today – is very open to that charge. But we all know that Naughtie is a dyed-in-the-wool Labourite who finds impartiality totally impossible).
There has at times been an hysterical clamour on this site shouting at the BBC for its failure to cover honour killings properly – omitting pertinent facts about faith etc. This clamour is entirely right and proper – it is in the public interest, happens on our doorstep, and is extremely newsworthy. So congratulations, John Reith, on your beloved corporation’s coverage of honour killings on Today. I suppose that late is better than never.
I don’t expect well hear much of this on Al-Beeb unless it’s on CBBC explaining how the Taliban are so generous that they offer free clothes to children!
Afghan boy outwits Taliban:
6-year-old says militants tried to trick him into suicide bombing against U.S. troops.
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/229384
Northumbrian – ” It would also have been nice if the BBC had given more coverage (or any at all, because I can’t recall seeing any) about the case of Lina Joy”.
No, none at all. Apart from this news artice, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6703155.stm. Or this one, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/crossing_continents/6150340.stm. An article which, incidentally, covers the Joy case in considerable depth, begins with the quote “If people know that I’ve converted to Christianity, they might take the law into their own hands. If they are not broadminded, they might take a stone and throw it at me”, and is based on a flagship Radio 4 programme (Crossing Continents) which was also repeated on both Radio 4 AND the World Service.
No, no coverage whatsoever.
Sorry, but do your research before throwing out statements like that, it totally undermines your credibility. It was no harder to find these articles than a search for “Lina Joy” on the BBC website. Oh, and both articles are third and fourth if you do a Google search for “Lina Joy” too. Do you do ANY research before you make a claim on here?
As usual the BBC clones spring to the defence of the BBC when it comes to them publishing facts about Honour violence.(Violence?)Don’t we mean crimes BBC.
So on that note here is how the BBC reports that article on the main BBC News web page.
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/3218/image1my7.jpg
What impression does the BBC bestow with heading such as;
‘Honour’ violence ‘terror-linked’
Even better the CPS helped by the BBC try to reinvent just why ‘Heshu Yones’ died;
“Heshu Yones was stabbed to death by her father, Abdalla Yones, who had associations with a Kurdish nationalist organisation, says Mr Afzal.”
Right and there was me thinking it was because she fell in love with the wrong person that did it.”
Taken from the BBC in 2003;
‘Honour killing’ father begins sentence
A Muslim man is beginning a life sentence for murdering his daughter because he disapproved of her Christian boyfriend. Abdullah Yones admitted stabbing 16-year-old Heshu to death at their home in Acton, west London.The Old Bailey heard Kurdish Abdalla Yones, 48, murdered Heshu on 12 October 2002 because he feared she was becoming westernised.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3149030.stm
I get the impression the BBC is trying to promote the vision that Honour crimes has nothing to do with religion but instead points at culture and Terrorism as its root cause. Some culture seeing as how every Muslim country from Albania to Indonesia has no problem slitting the throats of its females simply because some male wanker finds his honour offended.. Even a blind man in a dark room at Midnight could join the dots and inform a deaf man of the common link. Somehow the world famed news agency The BBC can’t.
pounce | 26.06.07 – 10:36 am | #
Good grief, can`t see that getting an EU sticker :o(
pounce:
I get the impression the BBC is trying to promote the vision that Honour crimes has nothing to do with religion but instead points at culture and Terrorism as its root cause.
pounce, you get the impression that lots of things are pro-Islamist conspiracies. They’re not.
In the last 24 hours, we’ve had the non-existent Kenyan schools scandal that wasn’t – sample issue: Well for a start, what the BBC don’t inform the public is that Madrassas means religious school.
Oh yes, they did, right there in the first paragraph:
Some madrassas, or Islamic schools, in East Africa are seeking to redress the image that such schools promote extremism..
Then there was the Cardiff woman awarded damages for discrimination by a tribunal, another lost pounce cause. As Jonathan (Cambridge) pointed out: “The tribunal was told he had apparently translated his comments into Turkish for the benefit of other members of staff” is in the BBC news article…despite pounce’s claim that it was not.
So-called “honour killings” are a complex mix of religion, culture and tradition, and even on pounce’s wildest imaginings affect only a tiny fragment of UK Muslim families.
pounce’s disclosures about his childhood at the hands of a violent Muslim father are a cause for sympathy. But endlessly playing out his feelings about Islam in this obsessive and wildly prejudiced way cannot be good for him or the credibility of Biased BBC.
Bus Bombers Seek Israeli Protection From Head-Choppers:
“Reality has a way of forcing the truth out into the open. After decades of terrorist war against Israel, Gazans know they are better off begging Israel for admission rather than facing the reality of Iranian-backed Hamas’ Islamist rule”.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28908
.
The BBC, its love for the Taliban and half a story
Aid failings ‘hit Afghan progress’
More than five years after the defeat of the Taleban in Afghanistan, the failure of international aid to make a difference to Afghanistan is now having serious security consequences.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6764345.stm
Yet again the BBC apes its love for radical Islam by promoting the negative image that nothing is going right in Afganstan.
Really here are a few snippets missing from that BBC article.
“Comprehensive eye care is one of the major programs that the Board of Global Ministries supports through partners in Afghanistan. In 2006, several eye hospital clinics treated more than 270,000 patients and performed more than 15,000 surgeries. In addition, pharmacies produced nearly half a million eye drops and hospitals distributed 22,200 pairs of glasses.
http://www.umc.org/site/apps/nl/content3.asp?c=lwL4KnN1LtH&b=2429867&ct=3948599
• Construction education that is relevant for the homes of the beneficiaries and the construction of animal shelters. The beneficiaries must provide their own construction materials;
• Water provision;
• Forest tree and Fruit tree cultivation, (more than 1,000,000 trees distributed);
• Establishing a protected herd of increasingly rare, indigenous breed cattle (Achey and Watanee), to safeguard their genetic distinctiveness;
• The construction of a community center where Extensionists provide training in construction and other vocations. Other outreach workers conduct health and nutrition training for participants and aid the formation of cooperative groups;
• Training Village Level (Primary Care) Veterinarians, and equipping these trainees to work as mobile independent providers;
• Distribution of chickens, goats and cattle to the members of cooperative groups who have completed a comprehensive preparation course and that have constructed appropriate shelter for the animals;
• A “Passing on the Gift” component to increase the number of beneficiaries;
• Introduction of a basic, small scale drip irrigation system at the demonstration farm; and
• Education in sustainable agriculture practices such as the use of kitchen scraps to feed chickens and goats – a new concept, the use of manure for soil enrichment, and the use of trees to improve soils and supplant manure as fuel source
http://www.craausa.org/currentprojects.htm
Hang lets look at the UN
http://ochaonline3.un.org/HumanitarianIssues/HumanSecurity/TrustFund/ProjectProfiles/ProjectsinAfghanistan/tabid/1299/Default.aspx
There are many more aid projects one can find on a simple web search
Afghanistan has been at war in some form or another since the 70s. That is over 40 years. Yet the liberal idiots at the BBC cannot seem to fathom out that 5 years on the ground cannot put right what 40 years of war has undone.
The BBC, its love for the Taliban and half a story
I recall it was discussed here that in the months after the kidnapping the BBC did a funny little dance, mostly reporting that he’d been captured in Gaza but occasionally grudgingly conceding that he’d been captured in a cross-border raid from Gaza.
Now they are back to hiding the truth yet again.
More slippery than a bar of soap.
Bryan | 26.06.07 – 7:09 am
I lodged a complaint once and as a result the piece was changed, but their instinct to obfuscate to anything that could cast the “Palestinians” in a bad light and give some sympathy to Israel is stronger than them.
I think it was Sir Winston Churchill who said, “the price of democracy is constant vigilance.”
In this case it’s honest, impartial reporting of the facts that we need to keep under constant scrutiny.
Honour killings ‘linked to terrorism’
“The Crown Prosecution Service has found links between so-called ‘honour killings’ and terrorism”.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=464433&in_page_id=1770
Melanie Phillips: “This man, Britain’s Chief of the Defence Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup believes the demonstrable nonsense about man made global warming, in the teeth of all the empirical scientific evidence to the contrary. He has swallowed all the falsifications about malaria and ice caps and hurricanes and polar bears; he believes the earth is now hotter than at any time in history despite clear evidence to the contrary; he believes that wild guesswork built on wilder hypotheses built on dodgy computer models has come up with the truth.
Worse, much worse • he believes that the 7/7 attacks were caused by ‘deprivation’. This man is the head of our armed forces, responsible for our safety •and yet he has not got the first glimmering of a clue about the reality of the globalIslamic jihad http://tinyurl.com/3kjl3
that threatens his country and the entire free world and against which his soldiers are fighting. Instead he parrots the sub-Marxist, cretinous claptrap that blames the west for all the ills of the world.
One day I will wake up and find all this was just a nightmare…
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/?p=1564
Funny that. That is, the number of Camel Corps wheeled out on Radio 4 in the last few days. Couldn’t have anything to do with the proposed new role for Tony Blair could it?
Heron “I certainly don’t think BBC TV is generally too biased towards Gordon Brown, though much of the radio coverage – especially Today – is very open to that charge.”
If it wasn’t for the Today team’s track record one could almost feel sorry for someone having to face that obstinate obfuscator so early in the day.
Perhaps John Reith can help me ferret out a link from BBC Online?
Bernard Manning is about to be buried, but at time of writing I see no report about his funeral, not even here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/default.stm
Other outlets, who aren’t publicly subsidised, are managing it:
http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&tab=wn&ncl=1117595060
Also note the BBC non-reports on Sir Trevor McDonald’s racist joke. Nothing to see here, move along now…
“Black bastard” = racist. PC crime.
“White bastard” = Oh, can’t you take a joke!
pounce’s disclosures about his childhood at the hands of a violent Muslim father are a cause for sympathy. But endlessly playing out his feelings about Islam in this obsessive and wildly prejudiced way cannot be good for him or the credibility of Biased BBC.
hillhunt | 26.06.07 – 12:14 pm |
In the face of the BBC’s craven attitude to all things Islamic, pounce’s childhood experience hardly invalidates the view that the BBC is biased in favour of all things Islamic.
How does someone who has lived as a Muslim or in a Muslim family become ‘prejudiced’? I’d have said pounce has more evidence to hand that the vast majority of the population (ie the 97% of us who aren’t/have never been Muslim)
The File on 4 piece is belated but welcome but the BBC will need to go a long way before it is truly ubiased about the Islam.
Hillhunt. Can’t see the Truth. When it’s in front of your nose
apoplectic:
pounce’s childhood experience hardly invalidates the view that the BBC is biased in favour of all things Islamic.
Indeed. In fact, it could illuminate his take on Islam.
But he gets things wildly, wilfully wrong so much of the time. Something else is going on, and it might be best if he addressed it in a less public way.
Ian Infidel | 26.06.07 – 12:48 pm |
GOOD POST!
It just goes to show how pernicious the BBC’s influence, among other things, really is.
There’s not even a chance of a military coup now. We need to take action. But the experts agree on the banning of guns.
Anonymous: I imagine they’re waiting til he’s in the ground before reporting that he’s been buried.
Yeah, right.
Stuck-Record | 26.06.07 – 10:59 am
Or should that be Yo right? Entirely agree Stuck Record – the Simon Hoggart programme – conveniently aired the day Blair stepped down as party leader – was an extended exercise in announcing “Even when we’re wrong we are right”. What hope is there for the people on this site who painstakingly point out the facts?
Ultraviolets:
First this, On Sunday:
What we need is a military organisation to force the end of the BBC, the EU, and wikipedia.
Now this, just before:
There’s not even a chance of a military coup now. We need to take action. But the experts agree on the banning of guns.
Sorry, aren’t you the guy behind that daft cuttings-job video denouncing the BBC as evil?
What would you call fantasisng about a military coup in a democracy? Enlightened?
Ultravolets: “There’s not even a chance of a military coup now. We need to take action.”
What action have you got in mind? An armed storming of Television Centre perhaps? Please elaborate on this!
Well TVC has been bombed in the past of course…
It would take a lot more than brownstuff to make me feel even slightly sorry for the consistently most biased of them all Toady Programme!
But he gets things wildly, wilfully wrong so much of the time.
hillhunt | 26.06.07 – 2:12 pm |
Hillhunt. Pot. Kettle. Black.
hillhunt (ex BBC light programme) and other beeboid apologists
Its actually really simple.
You all opposed the poll tax (quite right too).
But you fail to see that the licence fee is another poll tax.
What’s more it hits the poorest members of the community proportionately the hardest.
Privatise the BBC and give us the choice.
If you are biased then we can vote with our feet and not watch your adverts or pay your subscription.
If the BBC is as fine as you say you it is you will trounce all opposition and make far more money for even better programming. And it will free you from any worries of government intervention in programming. What are you so worried about?
The second world war finished over 60 years ago. There is no need for a state broadcaster paid for by a poll tax.
Give us the choice!
Reith
I saw the last few minutes of Panorama and I have to say that I was impressed – surprised – with its objectivity and lack of sympathy with GB.
The trouble with your general hypothesis is, that these exceptions rather go to prove the rule insofar as they are notable exceptions from the usual all-pervading supportive nature of the BBC for Brown’s Labour. The coverage from the special conference was particularly bad – all BBC correspondants looked excited and enthralled to be part of the new leadership, rather than report objectively. They seemed to be caught up in the thrill of it all.
And yes, why was the 10 o’clock news OB covering the floods from somewhere that did not appear to be actually flooded?
HH: “What would you call fantasisng about a military coup in a democracy? Enlightened?”
Imagine it though: a group of frustrated malcontents throwing molotov cocktails through the windows of Bush House.
“Our community feels marginalised and misrepresented. We had to do something.”
Wonder if the Beeb would call it terrorism.
Hillhunt: You’d better watch out – there may be dogs about….. 😉
apoplectic:
Hillhunt. Pot. Kettle. Black.
Wildly wrong? Moi? When?
Even Ryan in his OTT guide to dealing with me, points out that B-BBCers rarely win an argument on fact….
Argue with HilHunt about a BBC lie and you are likely to be caught out.
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/3861044074615880734/#361672
Have a look at pounce’s rant about the Kenyan schools and address the facts. Ditto the Welsh waitress case. It’s a pattern, and whether we agree on BBC bias in general or not, pounce consistently weakens the B-BBC case by making such a fool of himself.
Anonymous: I imagine they’re waiting til he’s in the ground before reporting that he’s been buried.
Thom Boston | 26.06.07 – 2:20 pm | #
Well, the service is at a crematorium right now, but I look forward to the upcoming report on BBC Manchester.
Meanwhile, what about the non-reporting by the BBC of Sir Trevor McDonald’s outburst?
Tom is also a nickname for Thomas, just not an unbelievably pretentious one.
Have a look at pounce’s rant about the Kenyan schools and address the facts. Ditto the Welsh waitress case. It’s a pattern, and whether we agree on BBC bias in general or not, pounce consistently weakens the B-BBC case by making such a fool of himself.
hillhunt | 26.06.07 – 2:55 pm | #
And do you believe that people that visit this blog undecided leave utterly convinced by your arguments, manner and perceived superiority?
.
For Herr HH and all you Beebers out there ( sung to a well known tune )
“You better watch out
You better not cry
Better not pout
I’m telling you why
Ultraviolets is coming to town
He’s making a list
And checking it twice;
Gonna find out Who’s naughty and nice
Ultraviolets is coming to town”
Mind you he does have a point —- activism and militancy seem to carry nooo stigma nowadays, they’re even regarded as desirable and chic traits (in some quarters).
.
The BBC’s head of comedy, Jon Plowman is to quit the corporation after 27 years.
He said he wanted to return to the coalface” of programme-making as a freelance producer, after 13 years as a comedy commissioning executive…
He will also be working as executive producer on a ‘big climate change comedy project’ for BBC One.
http://www.chortle.co.uk/news/2007/06/26/5471/bbc_comedy_chief_quits
Can’t wait.
Ref the BBC clone.
Note it writes;
“Have a look at pounce’s rant about the Kenyan schools and address the facts. Ditto the Welsh waitress case. It’s a pattern, and whether we agree on BBC bias in general or not, pounce consistently weakens the B-BBC case by making such a fool of himself.”
Since when have the detractors of this board defended any stance that this board presents.
BaggieJ:
Privatise the BBC…If you are biased then we can vote with our feet and not watch your adverts or pay your subscription.
If the BBC is as fine as you say it is you will trounce all opposition and make far more money for even better programming. And it will free you from any worries of government intervention in programming. What are you so worried about?
Several points:
1. Almost nobody in the commercial broadcasting sector would want the BBC privatised. The BBC would suck so much advertising/sponsorship/subscription revenue out of the market, several others woud go under. What would that do for choice?
2. Assuming it would reduce Government pressure is a big If … but it would inevitably lead to extra pressures.
3. The competition for revenue would force naked populism to replace width and quality – just look at the blandness of American mainstream TV. Many valued services would disappear as the advertisers demanded they emphasise the key buying markets, of which the 16-34 year-olds are by far the most desirable. Yoof TV anyone?
4. It would potentially leave the BBC open to equally insidious pressure from advertisers, threatening the BBC’s unique championing of consumer issues. When did ITV, Channel 4 or Sky last broadcast a consumer series willing to take on big business on behalf of the ordinary viewer?
5. Look what has happened as competition has bitten hard at ITV, Channel 4 and others. More me-too reality shows, greedy quizzes, tabloid journalism and much, much less regional programming.
6. When did we last see a major UK media company run by an enlightened, hands-off owner? Maxwell and the Mirror? Conrad Black? Richard Desmond? Carlton TV? The Barclay Brothers? You really prefer people like these to the BBC?
7. Take Murdoch: The coarsening of tabloid culture, cheque-book journalism, sleazeballs like Clive Goodman and Mahzer Mahmood, kow-towing to China, overdue influence on politicians, tax avoidance and the corrupting of professional sport. Fancy him in charge of the Beeb?
Really?
Anonymous: “Well, the service is at a crematorium right now, but I look forward to the upcoming report on BBC Manchester.”
Or you can find it here, on the News website – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ententertainment/6241604.stm.
I’m not going to bother with the question of the pretentiousness of my name. I find ad homonim attacks tedious and dull. Sorry.
Heron:
And do you believe that people that visit this blog undecided leave utterly convinced by your arguments, manner and perceived superiority?
The facts, Jack. Just the facts.
If the Kenyan critique is pants, I’m sure you’ll let me know. But it’s not, and the hapless pounce is encouraged by the warm bath of anti-Islamic approval that he’s on the side of the angels. But angels prefer truth. And that’s not his forte.
Superiority? Really? I’m not superior to anyone. Nor am I inferior. Issues of status don’t arise.
“corrupting of professional sport”
Corruption or not I’d rather have a Murdoch funded Premier League employing some of the best players on the planet than the hideous slog of 80s division 1 any day.
Ditto the rugby.
Ditto the boxing.
The dying sports seem to be those that are still covered by the Beeb. Snooker? BDO darts?
Hillhunt “The competition for revenue would force naked populism to replace width and quality – just look…”
Just look through the BBC TV schedules, especially daytime. Can you find hours & hours of programmes that are peculiar to the BBC or of any value?
Or are you saying that thanks to the BBC every station is producing programmes on junk sales, buying a house, ditto abroard, changing your wardrobe, etc. etc., & without the BBC the programming would be even more dire?
HH, on your 1-7:
All well-made points, but with more than a tang of value-judgement.
The trouble with this argument is the “you don’t want that, you want this”
feel to it all. It’s as if you think you know what the population of this
country should be waching.
It’s a bit like arguing against a country having a democratically elected governent
by saying “well, most people in this country are just a bunch of chavs. You don’t
want them voting do you – you’ll end up with a chavvy government. No, fat better
to have THIS dictator – he’ll give eberyone what they really need”
If all TV channels were optional (i.e. you paid for the ones you wanted)
people would get exactly what they wanted. If people wanted greedy quiz-shows,
that’s what they’d get (one could say they’d get what they deserved if you like,
but one really shouldn’t judge, if that’s what most people want).
OK I know this is a bit simplistic – the minority would be unrepresented, but
this is what you have in a democracy unfortunately.