So, hands up all those who think that Arts projects headed by Alan Yentob to mark the refurbishmeof Broadcasting House costing licence fee-payers £3.9m is well worth it? It’s that “special relationship” that the BBC enjoys with the British public, right?
BECAUSE THEY ARE WORTH IT?
Bookmark the permalink.
So What! Can someone please explain the purpose of Biased BBC?
It should be self-erasing if there was any hint of success. Al-beeb and all its wasteful and one-sided propaganda is still there, thriving and embarrassing the nation. Indeed, the continued existence of Biased BBC reveals its own failure!
It’s a long process, we are not alone and every little bit helps. By the same logic we should abandon the Royal Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals because dogs and cats are abandoned, every day.
Sure, you’ve convinced me. I shall no longer make sarky comments about the BBC!
When we do the terrorists win.
Its rarely about any sort of bias at all – usually any bias is the result if spin. Its actually just about a good moan about the BBC whether well founded or not.
Having said that, the recession at least makes this seem like a waste of money and when you consider the scrutiny the BBC is under (a lot of it irrational) it does seem stupid that someone would make a decision to place monies in this way. Its not bias in any way, its just idiocy
burbette
So what? So plenty.I object to every penny of the money lavished by Yentob and his cronies, get that? So, I provide a forum for others who may share this view. The PURPOSE OF b-bbc is to reveal every aspect of BBC BIAS including its disgraceful use of OUR cash. Did you think this website was going to destroy the BBC? Of course not but we can highlight issues – we can make waves beyond these pages – and we will be remorseless in this end. Got it?
David, do you think your refusal to apply your own rules of civility to people such as Martin helps “make waves beyond these pages”?
Do you not think that his comments only help Biased BBC’s reputation head downwards?
PD James skewered the DG prat Thompson brilliantly on Radio 4. I was amazed she was invited, but I guess it just proves the BBC is even-handed !!!!
Don’t her novels also tend to get televisionized on ITV?
Well, they will from now on, anyway.
Woops, sorry, wrong thread !
Shouldn’t this money have gone to improve salaries for all those poor very, very young people who are paid very, very low wages that BBC management is always shedding crocodile tears over any time someone brings up the issue of exhorbitant BBC salaries or factual errors in news reports?
Scott,
Get back to me the next time the Daily Telegraph praise your blog as helpful reading….
Nice to see you’re not letting your ego get in the way of answering the question…
(PS: My work website was in the Telegraph’s recent 101 Best Websites list. Care to answer the question now?)
You mean this one
http://blogs.thestage.co.uk/podcasts/2009/12/the-stage-100-the-stage-podcast-50/index.html
The Stage Newspaper Limited
webmaster [at] thestage.co.uk
Employees: 25 – 100
Ownership: Privately Held
I hardly think that counts as a blog – its actually the website of a newspaper.
The Stage 100: The Stage Podcast #50
By Scott Matthewman on December 30, 2009 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
I suppose you come here for some company.
“I suppose you come here for some company.”
I think that should be
“I suppose you come here for some company, luvvie.”
Well done for helping David vance avoid the difficult questions again, Tooky. It’s very charitable of you considering he rarely needs the help.
I reiterate: do the ooutporings of people like Martin harm, or help, the effect of Biased BBC outside the rarified confines of its commenters?
The continued evasion suggests that Vance knows the answer, but doesn’t want to admit it. Much like he knows that he once spent a whole blog post berating a BBC programme until it was pointed out that he’d actualgly been watching Channel 4. On any other website, that would have merited an apology at the very least — Vance has refused to even acknowledge that it happened.
I ask you, does behaviour like that really qualify him to preach on standards of reporting? If he can’t meet his own standards, why should anybody else take any notice of him?
Apologies for the typos – wouldn’t it be great if JS-Kit had a preview mode?
David Vance
Of course we don’t actually want to destroy the bbc. Most of us just want an objective (as far as that is humanly possible), honest reporting of facts. If we wanted opinion and crummy showmanship we would just go to the superficial, emotional tabloid rubbish.
So tell us what Biased BBC has accomplished over time to change the opinionated propaganda machine that is our state broadcaster.
Huh?
I would quite like to see the BBC-Guardian-Academedia Complex destroyed. It’s a corrupt entity grown fat on quasi-socialist nonsense.
The BBC can live or die in the democracy of the free market.
I just don’t want to pay for it except as a voluntary consumer transaction, if I so choose.