Chris Hartnett responds…
Oh my days!
I must have really enraged poor Simon MacDonald in the BBC Family Trees post to have him forgo his spellcheck! Given his stating that he really “has no opinions one way or the other” about what I said -which he says he didn`t find in my” foolish drivel” anyway!…I can only quake at the level of abuse I`d be getting if he REALLY had an opinion about it all!
So Simon-let me summarise for you.
1. I`m not alone in thinking that the BBC zealots that proseletyse on “natural selection” as a faith system seem curiously intent on getting the talent from a very small gene pool! I cited Brigstock as an example-and more of him later (not a phrase I thought I`d ever find myself using!)-but if you`re more relaxed about Dimblebys, Taylors,Wrights,Robinsons being my examples then let`s use them. Does that help?
2. These self selecting meritocrats are all too often the commissioning editors for their chums who are adept at the weekend rebellion. Like a Brigstock they will go at taxpayers expense (sorry to be so grudging) by plane to tell we the people of what our annual flight to Magaluf might do to the Inuit! Can`t imagine too many of our opinion formers going to Copenhagen by foot now can we?…but go they will!
3. Thier atheism is not “militant” maybe-but its consequence in the offices and schools of the land sure are! No crucifixes?…a Mandelson but not a Buttiglioni?…why fight on the prep school fields when you can use your slippers and creep through the institutions of Brussels or Bromley instead!
4. Simon ought to have got my point about an Ince or an O`Briain not truly being “edgy and out there “when they`d not “stick it to the man in Bradford,let alone Riyadh.” Christians make cheap targets but they open up churches by the Strand as the aimless controversists (like our Simon even?) milk their” oh so edgy “routines nearby.When Dawkins shows up at his “atheist Alzheimers” care home to cut the tape I`ll be more impressed about his “rational compassion” or whatever he`ll be calling it. He seems to have removed his memes theory from his latest “best seller”-maybe he`s learning he might have been wrong once-and if then…why not now?
I could go on-but Simon needs to know that the BBC are fond of safe celebrations like the recent one at the Berlin Wall when Christians opened their churches for the people of the East to plan-when a Popieluscko(not on my spellcheck!) died for a faith that a true rational great like Havel would value. Paxman could not be found anywhere near the revolutions of 89-none of them!…but still the archive film shows him shouting at Charles Wheeler when the firework display was an-old Reagans bit at the wall previously was left on the shelf,due to lack of time and never “editorial bias”.
Brand and Ross was a watershed-a dry run for the MPs expenses maybe?…but we`ll not be getting that debate on Points of View or Feedback-we might get it on Biased BBC which is why both Simon and I are keen readers! I write because “they`re only words mate!”..and even Nick Griffin deserves sparing from my pathetically weak blog if I`m as bad as you say.Hope you can make the time up you lost in writing to put me right Simon.I`m not worth the medication…honest!
not this again
I might as well say they’re pro-christian because of ian hislop
Is Chris Bartlett related to Chris Hartnett?
Chris, a little hint: If your ‘summary’ is longer than your original post then you’re doing something wrong!
However, to address your points:
1) “BBC zealots that proseletyse on natural selection as a faith system”. Presumably you also take issue with the educational systems and governments of every developed nation who also agree with the scientific consensus on modern evolutionary synthesis.
As for the bit about nepotism in the BBC, I think you’ll find it is actually the whole media/entertainment business world-wide that suffers from the same problem and cannot be blamed just on the BBC.
2) “commissioning editors for their chums” – this is the same point made again about nepotism. As for the bit about climate change, I think that argument’s been made multiple times on this site before.
3) “Their atheism is not “militant” maybe but its consequence [sic] in the offices and schools of this land sure are!”
Do you really think that Marcus Brigstock making a joke about Christmas dictates educational policy in this country?
As for the bit about separation of state and religion, what country do you live in? Try googleing “UK faith schools.” Faith based education is this country is live and kicking.
4) So you disagree about what comedy is edgy and you don’t like Richard Dawkins.
As for the Berlin Wall stuff, I read it several times and I don’t have a clue what you’re on about.
On a separate note, David I don’t often agree with the posts on this site but they’re normally pretty well written and sometimes amusing. This one is terrible, the grammar and punctuation really need some work to make it legible, it reads like the late-night ramblings of the pub drunk. Not the usual B-BBC standard.
Sue – whoops! Yes he is the same – my error!! š
Paulo – I am sure Chris will take on board the grammatical incongruities š
I asked previously that the poster use the same font size as David V and the other bloggers. Is there some reason for not doing so? Apart from that, the poster needs an editor. I haven’t read the whole post but of the bits I have, I cannot make head or tail of one paragraph in particular which reads like an assortment of phrases that do not cohere, connect or conclude in any intelligble way. I was left wondering what the people of the East were to plan or what “an-old Reagan’s bit” is.
Guilty of trying to pack too much information into as short a reply as I could muster. Was expecting my response to Simon MacDonald to be in THIS section and not as a piece(no complaints though!)
My point towards the end was about Newsnight choosing to use footage of their journalists crowing at the fall of the Berlin Wall some time after the real revolutions had occured. They did not use Reagans soundbite of the time because he`d be a “force of conservatism” to be airbrushed from their programmes.
No credit was given to the role of the churches in the east who let themselves be places to plan brave challenges to the Communists. The atheists amongst us might care to reflect on that!
I agree that as it was a rebuttal of a criticism of your original piece this post should have been in the comments section.
I have had some emails from people who say that they have been deterred from commenting because of difficulty with the registration procedure. I advise them to contact admin. I once posted a comment on someone’s behalf using the poster’s moniker. I offer this service as a last resort.
I think it is incumbent on posters on the main page to check their presentation if this site is to have any credibility.
Your opening line “Oh my days” reminds me of this cat which is how I now think of you.
Yes, sue, it took me a couple of months to figure out and to go through the rigmarole it takes to be able to register and post.
As well as the complexity of the thing itself, there is a lack of a set of clear instructions of how to do it. (And no, please don’t tell me the FAQs do that. They don’t – or they didn’t when I was looking.) A set of clear instructions is not the same thing as what is in the FAQs.
If anyone wants to write some, I will be happy to assist in testing them out for clarity and adequacy for newcomers and those not “in the know”.