I see that that the BBC have managed to take an alleged private comment from Carol Thatcher and use it as one more assault on the Thatcher brand. As you may know, Carol Thatcher is supposed to have used the word “golliwog” in reference to some Tennis player. However the point is that IF she did say this she did so off-air in the green room and so it is a private matter that the BBC have ruthlessly turned into a public affair. I’ve been in BBC green Roomsrmore than a few times and I could raise eye-brows about some comments made in my presence if I so chose. But why would I break confidence in this way? Even if I was diametrically opposed to another person’s point of view, what they say off-air has to be private. Clearly Carol Thatcher should be much more circumspect in what she says, but for me the greater crime here lies in the BBC’s blatant breach of confidence. Ultimately, the BBC hate anything that has the Thatcher imprimatur, a fact Carol should have been more aware. Your thoughts?
YAY!!! Five live has a Muslim guest speaker on to slag off Thatcher. What a shock. So no chance of Ken Livingstone or Abdul Bari Atwan being slagged off.
To be fair to the Today prog this morning, even the presenters seemed to think much of it is nonsense. And they summed up the listeners’ email reaction in one word – “ludicrous”.
BBC with egg on its face again. Lots of media coverage. It is beginning to look like the public reaction is that Thatcher made a small private gaffe, the BBC is making a huge public gaffe.
Muslim Muslim Muslim. Why are they getting involved here? Golliwog is something that is related to Afro Caribbean people NOT bloody Muslims.
Here we go again, why can’t Muslims just butt out of things that don’t apply ot them?
The snitch was Jo ‘send them poo’ Brand. New world order stasi informant for Heir Brown.
Faty Brand. Another left wing unfunny comedian that makes Clare Short look sexy.
I wonder how long Brand will go before a torrent of complaints now go in about her?
I’ll be watching for sure.
Jon 12.33
It all seems very Soviet Union-like. They are trying to drive us crazy. Getting worse by the day. Stasi wannabees BBC now a mix of ‘Matrix’ and ‘Python’. A very Pythonesque moment late last night on BBC24 on the Carol Thatcher non-story (golliwog : a much loved cuddly toy and jam logo) : they had a short clip of a lawyer who looked like a cross between Ken Dodd/Dame Edna’s Les Patterson/Andy Murray on a bad hair day, standing there saying very seriously, that to call someone a golliwog is a derogatory term. A little earlier Paxman’s idea of an argument : ‘no it isn’t/yes it is/no it isn’t/yes it is……
You mean that wasn’t Ken Dodd?
Jo Brand is funny.
“Best way to a man’s heart is through his sternum with a kitchen knife”.
Much of this hangs on
the colour of the tennis player surely. If white, then OTT; if black, probably right.
Who decided, I wonder, that this term was either offensive or racist?
There are many terms I and others may consider offensive, “white trash” anyone? “Trailer Trash”? how about “Kuffur”… the list is endless.
Who, WHO are these unelected, un mandated people who think they have some sort of right to ban, suppress or castigate the use of ANY word in the language?
I always totally reject anyone who attempts to modify or pull me up about “un PC” language. I refute the thought Police and any interpretation they may attempt to put on a word.
My language is tempered by the company I am in and whether the context may, MAY, not convey what is meant by it’s use.
I expect to find myself in trouble in the future because I will not bow to other peoples interpretation of what word is good, and in their opinion, what word is “bad”.
THAT will always be for ME to decide.
oh david, this is the best yet:
”assault on the thatcher brand”.
i’ve read some silly things here, but nothing tops that. right of the box that one.
yes, its an orchestrated BBC conspiracy against the child of a former PM. do you realise how silly that sounds? do you realise how pathetic that makes you look for writing that? do you realise comments like that remove ANY credibility this site may once have had?
TPO:
“The last time I saw Paulin was on that pretentious tosh that used to follow Friday night Newsnight and hosted by some bald headed poser.”
Well, I know Kirsty Wark’s thinning on top quite badly nowadays, but I wouldn’t call her bald.
She’s still a poser, though.
Field.Size:
“…There are many terms I and others may consider offensive, “white trash” anyone? “Trailer Trash”? how about “Kuffur”… the list is endless….”
black man on Radio 5 phone in. The sort of comments you quoted above are not the ‘same’.
Coz blacks were all slaves (even though many of them actually came here from Africa not the Caribbean) they are allowed to be offended and calling white women ‘slags’ or ‘whore’s’ is not the same thing.
Apparently.
one can only wish that our state broadcaster, Al beeb, actually used this standard of disipline when it came to the matter of the cockney with the speech impediment
we need to get to the gritty nitty of this mater asap
martin | 04.02.09 – 12:22 pm
“black man on Radio 5 phone in. The sort of comments you quoted above are not the ‘same’.”
Again, my question is…
Who are these people to decide that is the case or not?
It seems the whole world is in on the act of deciding if I can be offended or not.. or if I offend or not.
Unfortunately for them, I am the final arbiter of that, and not any self appointed Tom, Dick or harry.
FS
“Best way to a man’s heart is through his sternum with a kitchen knife”.
That’s funny? An incitement to violence, surely.
Just suppose a male comedian had made a similar joke about women.
‘Mail’:
“BBC axed Carol Thatcher after golliwog joke ‘to take revenge on her mother’, claims Tebbit”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1134663/BBC-axed-Carol-Thatcher-golliwog-joke-revenge-mother-claims-Tebbit.html
A favourite on BBC music programmes for years, until the ‘politically ‘correct’ regime took over:
Debussy’s ‘Golliwog Cake Walk’,
played by Barbara Tomaskova
( 3 mins, video clip ):-
mikewineliberal: Jo Brand is NOT funny. Do you have a thing for really fat women?
Daniel Hannan:
“BBC was wrong to sack Carol Thatcher”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/daniel_hannan/blog/2009/02/04/bbc_was_wrong_to_sack_carol_thatcher
Nicky Campbell was pretending a ‘balanced’ discussion about Carol Thatcher while the news flashes throughout his programme gave the true BBC opinion on the matter – Carol had been ‘kickedoff’ ‘dropped’ ‘dumped’ ‘got rid of’ by the BBC. The newsreaders actually sounded quite triumphant.
What a group of clones/clowns!
Is it the case that the only people whom the BBC sacks for its view of what is deemed ‘racism’, are white?
To the BBC, its definition of ‘racism’ seems to be exclusively something committed by only whites, e.g., three months ago:
“Sam Mason sacked from BBC radio Bristol”
http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Local-BBC-radio-presenter-sackedarticle-464172-details/article.html
Does the BBC even accept the notion of non-white racism?:
“Caucasophobia – the accepted racism”
by ‘Fjordman’:
[Extract]-
“I am tired of ideological censorship. Western nations can never mount a defense against Muslim immigration if this is always dismissed as ‘racism.’ But above all, if you believe that non-white racism exists, it is actually immoral not to deal with the problem and its victims. I am convinced that not just non-white, but also anti-white racism, are real and underestimated phenomena.”
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2006/10/caucasophobia-accepted-racism.html
I want to know what someone actually said (and about whom) if they are going to be sacked for it.
According to the BBC News report I saw on the website, Carol Thatcher referred to the tennis player “as a golliwog”.
But did she?
Her spokesman is quoted as saying that she made a joking remark about the gollywog on the jam jar.
Did she actually say that the player was a golliwog? Or did she say that his image reminded her of the jam jar golly?
What were the actual words and the context? Typical of the sloppy BBC not to actually tell us the plain facts and the context.
Perhaps if we knew that we would be in a better position to form a view of the degree of heinousness of alleged offence and the BBC’s subsequent actions and penalty. For us to actually know that wouldn’t suit the BBC, though.
I hope that someone else will kindly oblige by telling us what she said and in what context.
Meanwhile it is apparent that the BBC has a stack of double standards about who can be offensive and to whom.
Several have been mentioned here already including one of the two in the green room – Jo Brand. The other one, Adrian Chiles (Mr So Sensitive & Deeply Offended about apparently a joking reference to a jam jar gollywog) is well known for orchestrating a crowd hate towards female contestants on a programme he presents on BBC 2 about The Apprentice, in which he freely uses offensive and abusive language and whips up feeling against the chosen hate figures under guise of “wit”, while extravagantly praising and elevating to hero status the most obnoxious, crude and offensive male contestant – usually one with a brown skin (I’ve forgotten their names to cite you the most notorious examples, but they are well documented). He is the ugly, half-witted, oafish face of the BBC.
There are plenty other examples of BBC offences:
– Ross was at it again on his return, making gross remarks about sex and an elderly woman; he had also (pre-Sachsgate) made remarks that were juvenile, lewd and disrespectful both to a former PM (Mrs Thatcher)and to David Cameron, and he regularly does the same to female guests;
– he has a group called “Poofs” on the show. It’s a joke, apparently, (although, I understand, Carol Thatcher may not joke), even though it is supposedly an offensive term for homosexuals and who may therefore be hurt by it, even if Ross the Gross & B’Oid Farm inmates find it funny;
– Ann Robinson made deliberately derogatory remarks about a whole nation of people – the Welsh. How offensive is that! And as far as I know, she is still employed by the BBC at a high salary. (My mother watches her horrible programme.)
I am sure that others here can add to the pile of examples of offence and the double standards that BBC revels in.
This whole kerfuffle is the BBC’s “Perfect Storm”. Setting aside the inexplicable – that the BBC employed Carole Thatcher in any capacity in the first place: I would have thought that she was beyond the pale to start with – this is a miracle of grist to the BBC mill. It is:
– anti-Thatcher (Mrs T=devil incarnate=responsible for the credit crunch/downturn/recession)
– anti-Conservative (Thatcher=Conservative=nasty party=racists in the BBC narrative)
– anti-indigenous Brit (white Brit=institutional racist)
and gives the BBC the perfect excuse to:
– suck up to ethnics (even if they couldn’t care less which it seems they don’t)
– get the Moslems involved as the model anti-racists
– forget about anti-semitism, that doesn’t count and any way Jews=Zionists=nazis
BTW according to this report in the Times on this affair:
“[Jo] Brand is the subject of a complaint to police from the British National Party after she joked on another BBC programme about sending excrement to people on a leaked list of members of the far-right group. Scotland Yard said that it was in contact with the Crown Prosecution Service to discuss whether that complaint merited an investigation.
A police spokesman said that no complaint had been received about Thatcher’s “golliwog” comment.”
Predictably, the risible (to be laughed at not with) fat comedienne is in no danger of being turfed out of her serial sinecures on the BBC. Her remark (made in public – I heard/saw her make it on one of the BBC “x at the Apollo” programmes, just before I switched channels – I can’t take the sight of this beached whale for too long without throwing up) was aimed at members of a perfectly legal grouping of white indigenes who, in my opinion, are grossly misled but who have a perfect right to organise and campaign without being vilified by obese slags on a platform provided by the state broadcaster.
George R | 04.02.09 – 1:37 pm | #
Believe it not George, times change – or do you think it’s still acceptable to refer to black people as coons too?
She did not call anyone a golliwog. She said that someone’s hairstyle reminded her of the Robertson’s jamjar golliwog.
In private.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and take the position that saying somebody resembles a golliwog is racially insensitive. So be it. Others have already made the Ross/Brand comparison, but I think the phone-in scandal(s) are more relevant here.
Carol Thatcher isn’t a major BBC star, is she? Wouldn’t she be considered more on the level of, say, a Liz Kershaw? Or somebody at Blue Peter, maybe. When it came out that these shows had been repeatedly lying to and stealing money from license fee payers and their children, Liz Kershaw wasn’t even suspended as long as Ross.
But the real problem as I see it is that Kershaw’s producer, Leona McCambridge, was fired for something like 17 fake phone-ins over a 17 month period, but her colleagues were angry about it, and protested!
Sensitive listeners may have wondered whether playing Rip Her To Shreds followed by I Fought The Law (And The Law Won) revealed a certain simmering fury.
They would have been right.
Staff at 6 Music were using the airwaves to sound a call to rebellion, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.
The 1980s songs happened to be favourites of their friend, a former Sony Award winner and now a former colleague, Leona McCambridge, who had been sacked from the BBC over the latest “fake phone-in” row.
“The station is playing all of Leona’s favourite songs as a secret mark of support,” explained a 6 Music worker as the tunes played. “Everyone is shocked by what has happened. They feel absolutely betrayed.”
To me, this is very revealing of the twisted morality at the BBC. Worse, these Beeboids were whining that it was really the fault of upper management.
“We have lost one of our best producers. People here feel they are being used as a scapegoat. If mistakes were made, it was simply because she was put under enormous pressure. No one wants to be the person to tell someone really senior that something is just not possible.”
Sights, the worker suggested, should be raised higher up the BBC hierarchy.
“Mark Thompson should resign. Greg Dyke resigned over Hutton and the BBC actually turned out to be right about that. The only difference between Hutton and this scandal is that it is ten times worse.”
What I’d like to know is, why is lying and stealing something for which BBC producers and lower level presenters aren’t responsible, but a slightly racially insensitive remark in a private conversation is an individual flaw, and worthy of the sack? And not only did her colleagues not protest and scream about betrayal, it was one of them who turned her in to the Thought Police.
Why not a slap on the wrist and more of Helen Boaden’s famous re-training sessions? Surely Carol Thatcher could have said much worse if she was actually racist. Saying somebody looks like a golliwog is marginally less racially insensitive than saying that the Jewish Lobby controls US foreign policy, and puts the screws on Egypt to keep its border with Gaza closed. Yet nobody at the BBC would be fired for saying such a thing.
Pretty twisted morality among Beeboids if they feel betrayed over the one, but not the other. And if I were a Beeboid, I’d be really careful about what I say around colleagues from now on.
And for those who think that David Vance is just making it up about the BBC having issues with the Thatcher name:
Carol Thatcher: How the BBC disgraced my mother
It’s not entirely unreasonable to think that something was waiting to happen.
Why exactly is “coon” offensive please? A Frenchman recently called me a “Rosbif”. Was it derogatory and disrepectful of my heritage? Tripe. Should I have called the “cops” ? Is referring to someone as “of Mediterranean appearance” any different when referring to dusky arabs. My missus tells me in Scotland they’ve been refering to the Pakistani-run cornershop “the Paki shop” for years.No one was ever offended, its descriptive/ factual, not derogatory. Should I have been offended All this faux outrage about “racism” is just that. Offensive only to those that are desperate to be offended to fuel their sanctimonious self-righteousness. Or self-leftiousness? Maybe the tennis player has a big afro frizzy hairdo, as you might say, like a golliwog. The race industry and its friends the thought police.
‘Evening Standard’
“Carol Thatcher aide: This is BBC vendetta”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23634611-details/article.do?ito=newsnow&
Richard Lancaster:
Times change but your use of the word’ coon’ suggests you don’t.
Times change: your BBC must sack Thatcher.
AndrewSouthLondon | 04.02.09 – 4:28 pm | #
If you can’t see that the historical use of a word as a racial slur has a bearing on its use today, or take into account the fact that certain ethnic groups have endured more persecution than others, then I find your eagerness to over simplify things rather sad.
Maybe we should all be allowed to refer to Jewish people as Kikes? They should just get over it and learn to take a joke, right? Jewish people have never had it harder than any other group have they.
I have always liked Adrian Chiles, I wish I could say the same for Jo Brand.
So I was surprised to say the least that he would give away such private confidences even if they were reprehensible.
But it turns out that he did nothing of the sort.
Nicky Campbell has gone on the record on 5Live and said that it was NOT Adrian Chiles that reported Carol Thatcher’s comments.
Unnamed BBC ‘insiders’ have confirmed this is the case.
In light of this perhaps some of the comments toward the top of this thread should be ‘reviewed’.
The BBC’s green room, and the witness for the prosecution only.
Millie Tant: You need to remember that in beeboid land ONLY right wing people are racists. Left wingers are ‘humerous’ when they offend.
BBC executives, at the end of today:
‘I think we’ve had a good day today: sacked Thatcher, and pushing with Gordon to get Gitmo people here’.
The way these things usually are, I’m quietly confident the informant’s identity will be revealed soon, though probably not by the BBC.
David Preiser (USA) | 04.02.09 – 4:24 pm
I’m going to go out on a limb here and take the position that saying somebody resembles a golliwog is racially insensitive.
Please explain why it is “insensitive”?
To say that a black man looks like a gollywog is merely descriptive.
If you said that a black man looks like a stabber then that would be insensitive, not necessarily racially, but are you not allowed to say (think) such a thing?
Are we not allowed to make any remarks at all about blacks?
“1984” was a warning, not a manual.
Richard Lancaster:
“…I find your eagerness to over simplify things rather sad.
Perhaps I find your eagerness to complicate pretty simple matters matters equally sad, however I accept that the specific word “coon” has “previous history”.
However the history of oppression is a tired meme. I haven’t oppressed anyone for a long long time, and I doubt whether you have either, or that this wealthy tennis play has suffered much oppression of late. So whats “victimhood” go to do with it?
JohnA:
She did not call anyone a golliwog. She said that someone’s hairstyle reminded her of the Robertson’s jamjar golliwog.
I heard the same thing on Today programme this morning. It all reminds me of this sketch from Life of Brian
This is pure Stasiasation(R). In the Kafkaesque Brownian paradise, people are encouraged to inform on friends, neighbours and families. No wonder that this is something the BBC can do with gusto.
Not only Livingdead’s antisemitic remarks, but also the behaviour of Jonathan Wanker and his Diddly Puppet Brand, should be cause for immediately cutting of any links with them.
Jo Brand is funny
Only a twerp like you could think that. I guessed your identity the instant I read this stupid statement.
I like Chubby Brown too.
Tell us a joke, Nox.
Currently 628 posts on the Points of View website. Haven’t read them all but the majority appear to support C.T.
At least, the BBC Radio 4 News Tonight led with this report:
“UK culture body halts Iran work”
[Extract]:
“The British Council says it has suspended all operations in Tehran after staff members were intimidated by the Iranian authorities.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7870503.stm
Unfortunately, the BBC’s Robin Lustig did not raise the key question about closing down the Islamic regime of Iran’s London-based TV studios of PRESS TV, which puts out pro-Hamas, Hezbollah, Taleban political propaganda around the clock on the Sky satellite.
But, there is no such thing as reciprocity with the Iranian Islamic Regime. Ahmadinejad can depend on British dhimmitude.
AndrewSouthLondon | 04.02.09 – 7:14 pm | #
Hi Andrew, I’m not trying to overcomplicate things. For what it’s worth I think that the context of the use of such words is all important. People screaming racist straight away can be counterproductive, in that legitimate complaints are automatically viewed as political correctness and without merit.
You are right, I haven’t oppressed anyone, nor am I going to take the blame for any of my forefathers (or even my father’s) perceived actions. Yet some people should display more sensitivity and take note of the fact that their race doesn’t have a history of being at the receiving end of oppression and subjugation. It may largely be paranoia, but you can’t they don’t have reason to be concerned.
“Yet some people should display more sensitivity and take note of the fact that their race doesn’t have a history of being at the receiving end of oppression and subjugation.”
That rather depends how far back in history you want to go.
This is all about the BBC’s hatred of the Thatcher name – it’s obvious.
Why no outrage over the Bratz dolls? Surely, they are prime examples of negative racial stereotyping – as if dolls portraying young black women dressed like hookers could possibly reflect the reality of life in the UK today.
MTV, anyone……..?
Richard Lancaster,
You’re absolutely right – I never cease to be outraged and offended at the arrogance and superiority displayed by the French every time I visit Paris. Don’t they realise the pain and the trauma we still suffer after their invasion all those centuries ago?
Now – where do I go to lodge my claim for compensation?
gordon-bennett | 04.02.09 – 5:23 pm |
Please explain why it is “insensitive”?
To say that a black man looks like a gollywog is merely descriptive.
Well, yes, technically, in a vacuum, I agree. But of course, the “golliwog” image comes from an era when, let’s be honest, the majority of the admirers of such an image would (due to their own head trip of a bygone era, not ours) view a person who looked like a golliwog as being of a “lower order”. That’s not the fault of any young child who honestly thought the doll was cute, and it’s not Carol Thatcher’s fault, nor is it the fault of anyone else who appreciates the icon on a purely aesthetic basis (again, on it’s own, outside of the racialist context).
So I get the concept of somebody who thinks the golliwog is cute, without any racialist thoughts at all. But in the end, the golliwog is the product of an atmosphere of genuine intolerance. It’s one of those growing pains that advancing societies have to deal with.
If you said that a black man looks like a stabber then that would be insensitive, not necessarily racially, but are you not allowed to say (think) such a thing?
Only if the black man was posed in some sort of obviously violent way would it not be racially insensitive. I mean, why else would a black man look like a stabber? Maybe I missed your point here.
Are we not allowed to make any remarks at all about blacks?
Hey, I’m probably President Obamessiah’s biggest critic here, and there’s no way anybody could say any of my criticisms had a racialist basis. In fact, I’m on record here – as are others – as saying that criticisms of The Obamessiah were (during the endless election process) being unfairly dismissed as racist. Not only that, but I’m pretty sure I’ve predicted that any post-election criticisms would be dismissed as racist. (That’s definitely not happening now, thank goodness, I’m happy to be wrong, and my country is the better for it.) The golliwog deal, though, is about something that comes from another era, almost another world, really, you know? That’s what makes it so tricky. The problem with the icon itself exists outside of the context of the controversy.
Actually, I think modern society has, to a certain extent, outgrown that world, and can honestly appreciate an image purely on it’s own intrinsic value. I can’t say what goes on inside Carol Thatcher’s head, of course, but her remark, I think, can be – outside of the context of Right-On Leftoid bigotry, unfairly historically based as it may be – accepted for the purely aesthetic statement she claims it was. If a child can honestly, without being indoctrinated into prejudice, think that such a doll is cute, what the hell can I say? After all, isn’t that really the ultimate expression of color-blindness?
Having said all that, I think Thatcher’s remark was never so insensitive as to warrant one of her own colleagues f@$king turning her in to the Thought Police. That’s just insane.
“1984” was a warning, not a manual.
From your mouth to President Obamessiah’s ears, and Nancy Pelosi’s, and Eric Holder’s, and Gordon Brown’s, and Harriet Harman’s, and Jacqui Smith’s. And Jo Brand’s and Tessa Finch’s.
PS: Has anyone else noticed that HaloScan’s SpellCheck feature is cool with “golliwog”, but not “HaloScan”?
TBH I don’t think there is anything political about this, its just the BBC being ridiculously OTT PC about race.
Brand mocks herself just as much as she mocks others. And her joke about men and knives is no worse than the stuff male comedians have spouted about women.
Prediction: The Beeb will insinuate that Resident Evil 5 is “racist” when it is released next month.