The traditional family unit remains the very best bastion against the growth of the State. One of the devastating consequences of decades of marriage breakdown here in the UK has been the resultant weakening of the family unit – so allowing Nanny State to enter our lives, interfere and contort things. I rather think the BBC appr0ves of this so that may go some way to explaining why a programme examining the connection between broken Britain and the sustained weakening of the family unit is buried away in a late night slot – having already been postponed during the local Council/European elections. To the Statist Beeb, Mum and Dad are optional extras. To any sane person, they are the essential bulwarks against the State. Tune in to BBC2 tonight at the 11.20pm to hear the connections the BBC would rather you didn’t! It’s a crucial topic and one that the multiculti moral relativists shy clear off lest we be judgemental. But without a strong family unit, the State just grows more powerful, more intrusive and it is a scandal that a topic of this importance is tucked away at a time when few will view it.
BBC FAMILY VALUES
Bookmark the permalink.
If the BBC doesn't want us finding this out, why exactly is it on the BBC?
James.
If you're not aware, there is a history to this, which was discussed on 'Biased-BBC' thread entitled: 'Burial of Respect', and appeared here on July 6.
Melanie Phillips had an article in the 'Daily Mail' (July 6) which contains this extract:
" A two-part programme for the BBC by the respected journalist John Ware about ‘The Death Of Respect’, which identifies family breakdown as an important reason for the rise of aggression, incivility and crime, has been moved by channel controllers from a prime 9pm slot to the ‘graveyard’ 11.20pm time because it is considered to be ‘too dark’.
"The real reason is surely that its message runs counter to the libertine ‘group-think’ of progressive opinion. That’s why such circles will try to paint the Tories as heartless and bigoted over their attempt to promote marriage.
"David Cameron should hurl that insult straight back. It’s those who have destroyed marriage and with it the lifechances of countless children, not to mention the health and welfare of abandoned women and men, who are the truly heartless and bigoted.
"But this applies to all those who have undermined marriage. Either ‘lifestyle choice’ is to be condemned, or it is not.
"The Tories are showing courage on marriage. They must be careful this doesn’t turn into incoherence."
[Incidentally, was it any coincidence that the video moment shown on this blog of Harperson 'having a word' with 'QT' Dimbleby immediately before he censored Tory Ian Duncan Smith, was when IDS was making a key point about family values?]
James:
They put it on to claim impartiality – but they show it at a time when few will watch.
The death of the family unit also contributes two more 'features' to British life.
1 – On the back of the nanny state, the growth of the welfare state as those broken components of a family have to depend on government aid and services for those aspects where a complete family unit could have supported each other.
2 – Those broken family's can't do family things……so the TV becomes the babysitter, the TV becomes the single parent's company at night as they can't leave the child unattended. All in all, the TV becomes the central axis of their lives.
All the better for the viewing figures eh!!!….or am i too cynical?
There seem to be a lot of people nowadays who "live as married" but have not quite got around to becoming "legally married". Perhaps the legal bit is not a priority at that point in their lives, and if there is no particular benefit.
There the non-trivial numbers of women among the above who claim to be "single parents", Stephanie Flanders now of BBC Stephanomics being the case in point, when she attacked an unwary David Cameron on benefits for single mothers. "I'm a single mother" she effectively lied. She lives with her long term partner and father of her children.
Thus the tradditional family unit is often still in place, but not in the data. Where it is not, is where the State has interfered to advantage career-choice single parent mothers. Londons Estates are now full of fatherless young men for whom the gang supplements the missing bit of family structure.And the difficult bit is the "West Indian Culture" bit no-one feels comfortable discussing, as the race card is always near at hand, up Labour's sleeve. And both political parties engineered that over the last twenty years, so no clean hands here.
Interesting to see if the programme has any anything useful to say about a solution, rather than what's wrong.We know that don't we?
So it was postponed and not shown before the elections, was this because the BBC thought it would benefit Labour?
David, another outstanding concept (if you don't mind me saying so).
Tune in to BBC2 tonight at the 11.20pm to hear the connections the BBC would rather you didn't!
We will henceforth complain that the BBC doesn't want to show us the programmes it is, in fact, screening. Genius!
Dig a little deeper and you find that on BBC3 they're screening – AT THE VERY SAME TIME – another doubtless worthy film about god-fearing folk named Family Guy!
Conspiracy? I think so!
Ahhhh…it is good to be back-I see the trolls/Beeboids have now got some sort of "Red Rag" beeboid site
Shame nobody can be arsed to read it…:)
I read it but being opinionated rather than educated couldn't understand it. Less irony and clearer simpler arguments might help us uneducated morons to see the error of our ways
"To the Statist Beeb, Mum and Dad are optional extras"
Not quite true. They are as much feminists as statist (the two are hugely complimentary).
Thus mothers are still considered a good thing by the bbc – it's the fathers who are very much an optional extra.
Generally bbc/government policy over the years has been mothers = good and fathers = unnecessary/pointless/dangerous/bad.
An example of bbc anti father bias could be seen a good few years back when fathers 4 justice were one of the biggest stories around.
You'd see the likes of Matt O'Connor invited onto all sorts of tv and radio programmes on other channels, yet the only tiem he ever got on the bbc was during a live broadcast when they had people on a roof somewhere.
I suppose the bbc completely vindicated their tactics. I.e. basically forcing them into protests – i.e. if you're not camped out on Harman's roof or on Buckingham place then we're going to ignore such an incredibly important cause completely and pretend it isn't an issue.
It's got little or nothing to do with the family unit really
Lots of single adults are affected by the government's war on drinking and smoking
How many children do you think would be welcome in a Friday/Saturday night pub with lots of drunken smokers?
Who needs traditonial marriage if you have gay couples adopting children? Why have children at all if abortion is readily available?
Why should the natives have children when Al Beeb's agenda is to make the U.K. islamic? Our muslim friends breed like rabbits?
This may sound a little harsh but it all fits nicely into Al Beeb's agenda if you ask me.
Good: BBC responding to public pressure today on 'Death of Respect', has article by John Ware:
"It wouldn't have happened in my day" ('UK' page.)
[Part 2 of 'Death of Respect' is next Thursday, 11:20 pm, BBC 2.]
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ashton-hits-out-at-police-leak-1080910.html
this clown was on Today crapping on about how it's scandalous that the written press (Quentin Letts)are so hard on the Labour MPs
The programme has been moved in the schedule because it is considered too depressing and not suitable peak time viewing. Make of that what you will.
It's by John Ware who is absolutely none of things David thinks he is or makes out in this totally speculative piece.
Sarah Jane
The BBC still prefers to to promote homosexuality, as required in Labour's 'Equality Bill'.
Strangle how the BBC commissioned, produced and broadcast the programme, and that John Ware had an article in the Daily Mail discussing the subject. How perverse?