I always enjoy the BBC’s idea of balance on key issues, don’t you? For example this morning on the BBC1 TV news programme there was an item on a matter of great concern for the nation – namely the price paid by convicts to make a phone call from prison. Yes, I know that you, like me, will be very worried at the way in which big business is ripping off our gallant prisoners by making them pay a higher rate for making calls from jail than the rate we all pay when making calls from our homes. In the studio to “debate” the issue was a bleeding heart from the Prison Reform Trust who was very upset that prisoners were having to pay higher call rates. To balance this the BBC had invited – yes, you’ve guessed it – a former convict who was equally concerned at the call rate prisoners had to pay. Two versions of the same liberal whinge – and all indulged by the BBC. Fair and balanced?
TWO SIDES SAME STORY.
Bookmark the permalink.
Not sure if it’s a question of balance, more a question of questionable quality of journalism.
The “story” is that some people feel the charges are too high. It’s the presenters who should have challenged the guests since the only other people who could have “balanced” the “debate” are people from the phone companies, a response which *I* could write in my sleep.
BBC: “Hey, greedy boy, how do you justify this?”
Company: “We quoted our prices to our democratically elected government and they accepted. If they don’t like it they can tender the contract again. We live in a free market and this is the going rate for prisons… etc etc”.
Perhaps another guest would be some hard-right death-sentence advocate? “Why give ’em a phone at all?”
It’s such a non-story I’m surprised that a) the producer actually thought it warranted a live guest slot and b) that it riled anyone who monitors the BBC.
There was also no mention of the higher costs of handling a prison contract. For example I imagine if there is a problem its not just a matter of arranging a time and sending any engineer to fix it. The engineer sent will have had to have been security checked and probably sent on a few special courses as well. The time of the visit will have to be carefully coordinated with the Prison authorities also as the engineer can’t just turn up.
Incidentally a family member worked on the renovation of a high security mental hospital a few years back. Due to the special circumstances the work took longer and thus the customer was charged more for it. All fairly standard stuff I imagine and not rocket science unless that is you are an arts graduate reading out a “charities” press release.
Hi David,
What are you suggesting? That people in prison don’t make phone calls at all? According to the BBC, a call cost at least 7 times more then from a standard payphone.
“A 30-minute call costs at least seven times as much as from a payphone, they say.”
Given, that prisoners don’t earn high salaries, that significantly makes it more difficult to maintain contact.
“The groups point to research that says that almost half prisoners lose contact with their families during their sentence. Prisoners are six times less likely to offend if they have a supportive family network.”
And what about phone charges from hospitals then? (and patients don’t choose to be there)
Gunnar,
They can write letters. Same cost. Why should they have access to a phone ? Prison is to keep them away from normal contact.
I bet many of them are running their drug dealing businesses by phone from pokey. Does anyone listen-in?
Yes, one often notices that the BBC has two guests debating something, and they both seem to be on the same (progressive) side. To be brutally fair however it can very occasionally go the other way. On the Today programme this morning they had Chris Woodhead and state school head teacher discussing exclusions. Woodhead was of the view that head teachers should ultimately decide such questions, and having an appeal process where the head teacher could be overridden by someone else was a bad thing. And the head teacher, not terribly surprisingly, agreed with him. On this occasion a furious progressive could reasonably have complained that there was nobody on putting the other, progressive, point of view (that the child should have hundreds of appeals to an ascending array of LEA committees, all charged with ensuring that a child can’t be excluded until he has a murder conviction. So on examples of the BBC leaning one way or the other on education policy it’s unfair to say that it’s 12,365 examples of leaning progressive to zero the other way. It’s more like 12,365 to 7.
“… Prisoners are six times less likely to offend if they have a supportive family network.”
“supportive family network”, not cheap phone calls.
Barry | 24.06.08 – 8:44 am |
You’re definitely right about this being lame journalism, and that the BBC ought do have done something like what you suggested. They would have actually had something concrete to discuss. They did do exactly that on the article to which DV linked in his post. Ooh, “shrouded in secrecy”!
But I think this just falls under the “A Criminal is Just a Friend You Haven’t Met, but Right-Wingers Have Mistreated as Part of that awful Mrs. Thatcher’s Legacy” category. It seems like twice a week they have some sort of advocate for reducing penalties, reducing sentences, coddling instead of corralling, etc.
On its own, it’s not so much. But in the context of a series of pieces like this (remember, BBC defenders are always telling us to consider the larger picture when assessing balance), I can see how it grates.
If they stopped spending their money on drugs, booze and fags (not the Mandelson type) they’d have plenty of money.
Stuff em. Oh and instead of supportive families how about working the bastards for 20 hours a day for 7 days a week and feed them bread and water? That’s much better than supportive families.
They should think about their family before they stick a kn ife in someone or rob diesel from a farm.
gunnar:
Hi David,
What are you suggesting? That people in prison don’t make phone calls at all?
gunnar | 24.06.08 – 9:29 am | #
That’s exactly what should happen. I always thought the purpose of prison was to deprive criminals of their freedom as a punishment for their crimes. As far as I am concerned that that means losing the the freedom to make phone calls, watch tv, play computer games, listen to radio, read newspapers etc, etc. etc. The problem is that our society and our politicians have gone soft on crime and criminals at the behest of the liberalist leftie luvvies and the European Criminal Rights Act.
Gunnar,
I share your outrage that calls from convicts cost seven times more than from a standard pay phone.
It should be ten times. Got it?
Hi David
You’ve got such a soft soul. Only ten times? I was rather expecting that you want everyone of them executed and the cost of the bullet charged to the supportive family network.
Looking up-thread you are being out-gunned by far harder guys posting here. David, be careful, you don’t want to come across as soft on crime or a wet-liberal. Got it?
Hmmm, What about those in prison for not paying the telly tax? 😉
The “prison reform trust” are on the speed-dial at the BBC.
Check out their website for their real views. They seem to want:
1) Prisons to be 5-star places with fabulous facilities and re-decorated twice a year in the latest style.
2) Prisons to be empty because the “lovely people who unluckily got in with a bad crowd” are all given non-custodial sentences.
Gunnar wrote:
What are you suggesting? That people in prison don’t make phone calls at all? According to the BBC, a call cost at least 7 times more then from a standard payphone.
I suspected, before I read the rest of your comment, that this is actually according to some twat from a quango or pressure group, and that the BBC are simply mindleslly regurgited a press release. Then I read on:
“A 30-minute call costs at least seven times as much as from a payphone, they say.”
{Insert game show bell sfx}
I was right. The BBC are once again being the handmaiden of some pressure group.
Given, that prisoners don’t earn high salaries, that significantly makes it more difficult to maintain contact.
“The groups point to research that says that almost half prisoners lose contact with their families during their sentence. Prisoners are six times less likely to offend if they have a supportive family network.”
As somebody else pointed out, write a letter.
Part of the BBC bias (or more honestly, journalistic bias in general) is that certain pressure groups get to have their press released treated as real news, with no critical look from the journalists. Look at which groups get such favorable treatment, and which don’t.