Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. This is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may also be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated! It’s your space, use it wisely.
General BBC-related comment thread!
Bookmark the permalink.
Seems like the NUJ should step in here. Will they? Will the BBC report on it if they did?
It may not be right to ask not to have the services of an ethnic group, but surely it`s not so bad as ringing an elderly person up and being offensive ?
Some people (“BBC comedians”)have criticised those who complained about the Brand/Ross stupidity who had not actually heard the show, what about the fact that even less would have heard the Mason teledialogue ?
Original Robin | 12.11.08 – 12:45 pm | #
Lots of people have said lots of things – doesn’t mean any of what they say is right or impacts official policy.
As I said, the public have shown they want swift action, and now the BBC is being criticised for it. Can’t win.
Lancaster:
“Swift action” to do what? The BBC bosses in Bristol have swiftly sacked a BBC presenter, apparently for the BBC bosses’ ideological imperative of multiculturalism.
From the BBC’s coverage of today’s PMQs: “1243 Nick Robinson asks whether Mr Cameron thought he could not “believe my political luck” with the debate veering away from the economy towards the Baby P issue.” Why does the BBC keep suggesting that the economy is where Gordon Brown is strongest? He has fucked it up over the last 11 years and the private sector employed middle class will pay for his ineptitude for many tears to come. The economy would be the key anti-Gordon Brown factor were the BBC not propagandising for Gordon Brown at every opportunity.
If the Conservatives manage to beat Labour and the BBC at the next General Election then they should conduct an investigation into political bias at the BBC since 1990 (20 years) and force disciplinary action for breaking the BBC charter against all found to have exhibited bias. I suggest Norman Tebbit as the man to lead the investigation, maybe backed up by Richard Littlejohn. Perhaps when James Naughtie, John Humphrys, Peter Allen, Victoria Derbyshire et al are sacked and replaced by unbiased journalists and presenters we will have a BBC worth paying the licence fee for.
I don’t know if anyone else just watched PMQs, but it was an absolute disaster for Brown. Even his own Cabinet Minister said he got the answers wrong afterwards. It revolved around the Baby P case, with Brown essentially saying the woman responsible should be her own judge and then telling Cameron he was being party political. I mention all this because the big chunky link to the HYS page that was on the politics page has just vanished. You can still get there via the main HYS link, but not the other way.
“Swift action” to do what? The BBC bosses in Bristol have swiftly sacked a BBC presenter, apparently for the BBC bosses’ ideological imperative of multiculturalism.
George R | 12.11.08 – 12:57 pm | #
No, that’s your conspiracy theories creeping in. She was sacked for a racist comment, as I outlined above. Tellingly you ommitted the turban part.
The interview on radio 4’s PM last night with the director of Haringey Social Services, Sharon Shoesmith, was woeful.
James | 12.11.08 – 11:45 am | #
We watched her on Breakfast News this morning.
Even my kids fell off their chairs laughing (with derision) when she said, to no evident reply, that…. ‘lessons had been learned’.
I would have thought the currency in that phrase had been well devalued by now by others in the new world order project being imposed on us.
Richard Lancaster,
What is racist about asking for someone who doesnt wear a turbin?
And what is the difference between this and asking for a female driver instead of a male driver?
Mailman
beeboids freak out when one of their presenters wear a cross.
What is racist about asking for someone who doesnt wear a turbin?
And what is the difference between this and asking for a female driver instead of a male driver?
mailman | 12.11.08 – 1:15 pm | #
Asking for a female driver is justifiable given that men are statistically liable to be more of a threat. You explain what threat wearing a turban poses.
You are of course welcome to take her line – that her 14 year old daughter would be scared of a turban. I can’t say I’ll take you particularly seriously though.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7722745.stm
note how the slant changes things:
concern over gay adoption (the public’s concern, anti-homosexuality)
becomes
concern over gay adoption views (something completely different, pro-homosexuality)
Lancaster:
Where do the BBC Bristol bosses say that Ms. Sam Mason was sacked, as you state: ‘for a racist comment’?
Despite the fact that the BBC normally puts up the full version PMQs not long after it has finished, they’ve only put up an abbreviated version which misses out the initial questions from Cameron. Would that be something to do with Brown was terrible today and the abbreviated version makes Cameron look like he’s scored cheap points.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7724541.stm
The BBC have radio networks specifically targeted at “blacks” and “asians” and then they complain when one of their staff acts in a racist way???
I mean, make your mind up. Is it reasonable to categorise and discriminate between people on the grounds of race or not?
Meanwhile:
“So it was Yentob who gave Wossy £6 million noddie”
[Extract – ‘Evening Standard’, Londoner’s Diary]:
“AS THE BBC’s £18 million presenter Jonathan Ross remains off our television screens, questions are being asked about who was ultimately responsible for the decision to award him his massive pay packet in the first place. According to insiders, the man in the hot seat was Alan Yentob, who was appointed director of drama, entertainment and children’s programmes at the BBC in 2000 and has been creative director since 2004.”
http://londonersdiary.standard.co.uk/2008/11/so-it-was-yento.html
Richard Lancaster: I would suggest that statistically Muslims are more likely to blow themselves up on our streets than non Muslims. So you point is?
Funny, don’t remember such an article about Laura Bush….
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7723547.stm
Regarding the alleged “racism” of a woman who requested a driver ewho did not wear a turban, isn’t it then somewhat hypocritical of the vile BBC to applaud and promote Hamas, a racist terrorist group that quotes the Protocols as its Charter and is unashamedly anti-semitic both in deed and thought?
Of course not! That’s about joos, you see!
Kill the disgusting BBC! Now!
So muslim cabbies can turn down a fare if the passenger carries alcohol or is accompanied by a guide dog without any problems but I can’t ask for a non-muslim cabbie?
And to think people here are first to bemoan the fall-back response of relativism.
Richard Lancaster | 12.11.08 – 10:50 am
Then let’s hear this good excuse for making what can only otherwise be taken as a request based upon prejudice.
Why should Sam have to explain anything to you. It is none of your business.
Don’t you think ou are being ever so slightly sanctimonious?
So what if her actions were based on ‘prejudice’, as you allege?
When I last looked there was no law outlawing prejudice in private phone calls.
In this country we have made discrimination on the grounds of race unlawful in certain circumstances • such as in employment, housing or the provision of some services.
Inciting racial hatred is also unlawful.
Fair enough.
But so far as I am aware, expressing a racial preference in all other circumstances remains perfectly lawful.
I expect there are limits even to your political correctness:
If a woman trying to conceive via sperm-donation be ‘racist’ ‘if she were to express a preference about the race of the donor, or must she take pot luck?
Is it racist to prefer blondes?
…. on the other hand, it is always good news when any Beeboid is sacked.
Dr R | 12.11.08 – 2:39 pm |
Can’t argue with that
If the BBC Bristol bosses were sacking Ms. Mason for ‘racism’, they’d say so; but because they don’t, presumably they’re sacking her for the worst crime in their book: non-compliance with their version of ‘multiculturalism’.
Beeboids will not accept this. They will rise up because they secretly do not accept multiculturalism being imposed on them (nor on British society), do they?
Abandon Ship! | 12.11.08 – 2:12 pm
Related to that gushing profile of Michelle Obama from Rajini Vaidyanathan, the following exchange took place on last Friday’s Feedback on R4:
Roger Bolton: Is there a danger also that because there’ll be so many interesting things to write about Obama that he’ll have a honeymoon, a rather longer honeymoon as a president than most do have?
Justin Webb: Yes, I think that’s true and I think there’ll be some people who don’t want to do him down, if I can put it like that, because of what he represents and in doing him down you appear then to be doing down a whole generation of particularly black people but also generally of the kinds of American who supported him so passionately and, if you like, of disrespecting them, and that would be a mistake – I think it is very important that his administration is treated with scepticism, the same scepticism we would use about any other incoming administration.
That must explain these headlines all treating the incoming administration with scepticism:
“Choosing the First Puppy”, “Peru offers Obamas hairless dog”, “Virtual World embraces Obama”, “Obama makes an impressive debut”, “Changing America dares to dream”, “Obama prepares for promised change”, “Viewpoint: Time to smile”, “Obama’s World • A wave of goodwill alters the US’s international position”
The were certainly never any worries in the BBC about “disrespecting” the people who voted for Bush.
“There were” not “The were”
Tom
I expect there are limits even to your political correctness
I wouldn’t count on it Tom, he’s either a total plankhead or a paid for stooge
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7723933.stm
‘Brown angry at baby killing’
‘called for cross-party support’
He ignored Cameron’s questions, refused to admit there was a problem in the procedures that were taking place in the aftermath and accused Cameron of playing party politics. Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.
I’m not familiar with (and don’t want to be) Sam Mason. Has she ever criticised others for their attitudes (c/w actions) to other races?
Her comment that she didn’t want anyone in a turban strikes me as racist, but not unpleasantly so, unless it exposes her as a hypocrite (not unknown within the portals of the BBC).
To request a female driver for a 14 year old girl is no more than common sense. On the few occasions I have had to arrange a car for my daughters I have always done the same, and instructed them not to get in the car if a man shows up.
Wearing my BBC Bristol boss’s hat, I say:
‘Sack anyone who says their daughter doesn’t like turbans! And NOW!’
“Asking for a female driver is justifiable given that men are statistically liable to be more of a threat.”
Richard Lancaster | 12.11.08 – 1:34 pm | #
I worked in the taxi game for years, and I can tell you that “Asian/moslem drivers men are statistically liable to be more of a threat” to women/girls travelling alone than non-Asian/moslem drivers. That’s a simple fact and you can call me what you like for stating it.
We had dozens of women requesting non-Asian drivers, but we always refused.
The only exception was a young Moslem girl who worked late nights in a casino. Moslem drivers would harangue and abuse her for:
– working with infidels
– working with men
– working in a casino
– working at all
– not covering up properly.
They’d insult her and her male relatives for allowing her to shame the family. Then they’d try it on with her, cos since she wasn’t sufficiently Islamic in their eyes, she must be a slut. Not all Moslem drivers subjected the poor girl to this ordeal, but many did. She told me she’d often be reduced to tears.
What would you have done?
Sent her a non-Asian driver – in which case you’re an evil racist?
Or sent an Asian/Moslem driver against her wishes and possibly subjected her to more hassle?
anon, who are you quoting? It’s certainly not me. And what’s all this stuff about muslims? The guy was a Sikh and she specifically referred to turbans. I don’t see how she could justify this.
Richard Lancaster,
In Re your post to mine @ 12.45
Cant you see the hyprocracy of the BBC and the mindset that follows it.?
What has made Sam Mason’s daughter so wary of Asian men? Perhaps the mother has “infected” her with racist views, or perhaps the daughter has encountered intimidation on the streets of Bristol from certain groups or gangs. The turban reference suggests Sam Mason isn’t the brightest bulb in the pack, but white girls are considered inferior by many Muslim men and are seen as acceptable and easy targets. Just saying.
No sign of liberal bias here. No, nothing at all. move right along
“She is in her early thirties, white, middle class and heterosexual, all of which are occasional causes of discomfort to her.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/comedy/clareinthecommunity.shtml
D Burbage: to be fair, I think you might be missing the irony (or maybe I am). It looks like that rarest of things, a right leaning comedy. I very much doubt it is, but I’m tempted to tune in.
“Richard Lancaster:
Asking for a female driver is justifiable given that men are statistically liable to be more of a threat. You explain what threat wearing a turban poses.”
So, taking your same line of reasoning…since blacks are statistically more inclined to be involved in violent crime (or just crime in general)…it is ok to ask for a white driver instead of a black one?
Mailman
Lancaster:
Yes, the BBC line enforced on Ms. Mason is: ‘SACK HER’.
What BBC law has she broken, to be sacked on the spot?
Although I do not know exactly what Ms. Mason’ s misdemeanour is supposed to be in the thinking of the BBC Bristol bosses, you definitively state that Ms. Mason’s cannot justify her remarks. And, presumably because you think that she cannot justify her remarks, you support the BBC bosses in sacking her. BBC natural justice?
D Burbage / Hugh
Give it a listen. I heard the original episode on Radio 7 not long ago when they had an “award winners” day. To me it seemed to be a well scripted mickey take of social workers, possibly written by someone with inside knowledge and deserved an award.
So, taking your same line of reasoning…since blacks are statistically more inclined to be involved in violent crime (or just crime in general)…it is ok to ask for a white driver instead of a black one?
Mailman
mailman | 12.11.08 – 4:42 pm | #
Sorry, I’m having trouble posting (getting an error).
What, black taxi drivers specifically are more likely to attack a female passenger than a female driver? I’ve never seen any stats on that.
“And, presumably because you think that she cannot justify her remarks, you support the BBC bosses in sacking her. BBC natural justice?”
George R | 12.11.08 – 4:45 pm | #
Could you please explain why “presumably”? You’ll notice I said I thought the response “heavy handed”, so tell me how you came to that conclusion.
Richard Lancaster
What all the fuss is about – transcript:
Mason: “I know this sounds really racist, but I’m not being . . . please, don’t send anyone like, you know what I mean. An English person would be great, a female would be better.”
Operator: “We would class that as being racist. We can’t penalise the Asian drivers and just send an English one.”
Mason: “You’ve managed it before.”
Operator: “Right, OK. I don’t agree with it personally.”
Mason: “It’s not your 14-year-old girl who’s, you know, is it?”
Operator: “Yes, but that’s racist to say you don’t want an Asian driver.”
Mason: “If it were me I wouldn’t care if it had two heads, but it’s my little girl we are talking about.”
So where’s the ‘crime’?
Mason made very clear she herself had no problem with Asians, and that it was her daughter who was sensitive about them.
She tried initially not even to use a race associated word, just saying ‘you know what I mean….”
Precisely what in the above exchange does the BBC class as ‘unacceptable’?
And, Mr Lancaster – why are you banging on about Sikhs? There were no Sikhs present. And plenty of Muslims wear headdress termed a turban in the UK. Turban itself is a Turkish word.
This Sam Mason discussion has turned rather ugly, hasn’t it? I don’t think it does us any good to start talking about how likely Muslim men are to assault white women.
I’m not sure Mason should have been fired for having a private thought. She didn’t say or do anything on air, nor to a BBC employee or anything like that.
The thing is, judging from the transcript, she wasn’t concerned at all about the potential violence of Mohammedans, unlike some commenters here. She was basically saying her daughter was afraid of Asians, especially those with turbans. She wins no parenting points for that admission, and there’s no question it’s a basically racist and prejudiced (turbans are religious articles, not racial) statement. It even seems like she was really speaking about her own prejudices, but tried to pass blame to her daughter instead: “If it was me, I’d ride with anyone, but my daughter’s a bigot, you see….”
If Mason shared all the concerns about violent Muslim males that some are voicing here, and had asked for female driver, full stop, then there would be no problem. If she had voiced the concerns about the statistical likelihood of a Muslim male viewing her white daughter as a target, while she may not be entirely inaccurate, she wouldn’t be in the right. Such a statement would be viewed as racist, just as much as what she did say.
But firing her for it smacks a bit of Thought Police. That’s not cool. It’s one thing to say that the BBC wants a multicultural, tolerant environment, blah, blah, but quite another thing to punish someone for their private thoughts outside the workplace. So, you know, send her to one of those BBC re-education camps they set up every time some Beeboid does a fake phone-in competition or whatever.
What’s worse is that the BBC seem to pick and choose which private behaviors they condemn in their employees. Publicly known drug abuse seems to be perfectly acceptable private behavior, even though it’s actually illegal in Britain. The BBC tolerates open anti-Christian bigotry from its presenters on air, yet someone’s private negative thoughts about another group are a terminable offense. We could go on and on about other unfortunate Beeboid personal antics, but suffice to say that the BBC has no problem firing someone for a private thought they don’t like, yet will tolerate illegal activity and other kinds of prejudice from their employees.
As I said, not cool.
Smack the woman around, tell her she needs to grow up, and that “her daughter” needs to be less prejudiced. But I don’t accept that a private thought is a terminable offense, especially regarding something outside of the workplace, and does not involve another employee.
Lancaster:
Should the BBC have sacked Ms.Mason?
Do you support her reinstatement?
George R | 12.11.08 – 4:59 pm | #
Why are you so concerned? I’d have thought a dressing down or brief suspension sufficient.
Tom | 12.11.08 – 4:56 pm | #
However you missed out – I don’t want her to turn up with a guy with a turban on, it’s going to freak her out. She’s not used to Asians.”
Also, you using what she said as a justification is rather laughable. All she needed was ‘I can’t be racist, some of my best friends..’
Anyway, Preiser has summed it up best.
Sharon Shoesmith looks like a typical hard-faced labour aparachik – should be fired without compensation forthwith! As it is, she will probably get a generous `performance’ bonus, such is the back-to-front way things are done these days.
The BBC reports the clash in the Commons between Brown and Cameron
In it they have a video clip which lasts for 3 minutes and 7 seconds.
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7724541.stm
The Telegraph does the same. Their video clip lasts for 3 munites and 31 seconds and starts later in the exchange.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/3446333/Baby-P-death-triggers-row-between-Gordon-Brown-and-David-Cameron.html
Wonder why the BBC missed out the last bits. Gordon’s damage limitation team at work again?
Having looked at those smug socialist shits again I could quite cheerfully execute all of them.
Lancaster stop digging you’re only making a prat of yourself.
mailman:
Richard Lancaster,
What is racist about asking for someone who doesnt wear a turbin?
And what is the difference between this and asking for a female driver instead of a male driver?
Mailman
mailman | 12.11.08 – 1:15 pm | #
———————————–
Mailman, I agree with 99% of your posts, however, on this specific post I have to disagree,
IMHO the presenter has shown a clear racist attitude to an ethnic minority.
The clear anti-Jewish/Catholic/Conservative/Republican of the BBC is something that is quite rightly highlighted on this blog, so it must follow that the Biased BBC should also highlight examples of BBC employees who show racist tendencies to other ethnic groups.
Lancaster stop digging you’re only making a prat of yourself.
TPO | 12.11.08 – 5:13 pm | #
On the contrary, I think I’ve exposed certain individuals who have previously maintained their only issue is with muslims and so take a moral highground.