Earlier this year we learned that the BBC was helping the Guardian produce its front-page scoops. An interesting series of tweets from yesterday shows that the licence payer is also subsidising technological advice to our national broadcaster’s favourite newspaper.
Here’s the head of all things digital and interactive at BBC Radio 5 Live, Brett Spencer:
A good morning spent hammering out our big interactive general election offering. Off now to do a bit of show and tell at the Guardian
The natural first port of call following a morning’s discussion of election coverage.
The Guardian’s Matt Hall was grateful for the BBC employee’s time:
Great presentation from @brettsr on #fivelive visualisation . He even came over to Guardian Towers to do it!
The editor of the Radio 4 blog Steve Bowbrick was there too:
Just grabbed a coffee with @bowbrick in the Guardian canteen. Talking blogs, governors, twitter & the like.
The Guardian’s head of audio Matthew Wells:
Great presentation about BBC 5 Live interactivity from @brettsr – Gdn can only afford a fraction of what they do, but will take inspiration.
A question from “medluv“:
@MatthewWells Did Guardian pay BBC industry rates for R5L presentation today?
The reply from Wells:
@medluv @brettsr no we didn’t pay. Equally my colleagues and I do similar talks at other organisations. It’s called collaboration
Are these licence fee funded presentations available to all newspapers, or just the BBC’s ideological soul mates?
I can’t imagine the BBC doing something at Daily Mail towers or even offering somehow.
Who the hell reads ‘Shitter’ anyway? Or ‘Narcissism Express’ as it should be called.
We all collaborate.
Some just collaborate more equally than others.
But nice that they don’t let ABC ratings affect their decisions.
Can’t have any of that ‘dumbing down’, now.
It’s the BBC-Guardian Industrial Leftist Media Complex — a sub-division of the Lumpen Marxetariat
“Collaborate” is an apt word. Collaborators in the destruction of freedom and the British way of life. Misinformation Central- the real name of the Guardian/BBC axis.
Pass the sick bag.
The only thing lefties are good at is complaining and homosexuality.
Even the BBC and its draconian funding model can’t help the lost cause that is the Guardian. Shit, these assholes lose more money per day than I’ll make in 10 years.
If such activities occurred in a private company, all these people would be dismissed.
But they are the BBC, the law or ethics, does not apply to them.
The Guardian lost about £35 million for 2008, a bit less for 2009.
A total failure in journalism.
Fine bedfellow for the BBC
The Guardian loses £100,000 a day. The editor has 12 “assistants.”
Imagine how much they’d lose without the GOVERNMENT SUBSIDY via “advertising for non-jobs.
WANTED Bisexual Race Diversity Officer to work with Nursery School toddlers. Recent arrival fast-tracked. Ability to speak English not required. £100,000 pa, plus benefits.
The liberal Simon Jenkins was saying today how he che3cks out the BBC in-house magazine “Ariel” (or Pravda) every time he visits Broadcasting House. At the backeach time are stacks of adverts for non-jobs within the BBC that not even Private Eye could invent.
Jack 19:19
CRB clearance probably not required either !
Grant, CRB? Sorry, what’s that?
It means you don’t enjoy playing with naked children, you know, the sort of thing liberals enjoy.
Martin — urrrgggh. Wish I hadn’t asked now!
Well you did!
Are employees of the BBC allowed to receive money for working elsewhere?
Jack 19: 44
Criminal Records Bureau. I am rather glad you didn’t know what it was !
If the left teaches us anything, it is that we are all guilty.
Except those banged up in prison. They’re all innocent. Especially the Mohammedans.
Refer my early warning post yesterday – re the papers review on Toady having been replaced by a selection of anti Tory stories. Surprise surprise , from memory most were taken from the guardian !
If anyone from Tory Towers reads this, you really do need to fire a very heavy calibre warning shot, very close across the bbc’s bows !
Some valiant soul at Tory Towers might fire a peashooter when they think the BBC’s not looking.
“From OUR OWN correspondent” on how more BEAUTIFUL European architecture today “surely” would be…but the Ottomans were sadly prevented from building mosques all the way from the Bosporus to Ballina:
“Radio 3 Sunday Feature: Sinan the Magnificent
Presented by Jonathan Glancey, Architecture Correspondent for the Guardian
2000GMT, 14 February”
I heard some of the fist snippet of this tosh in From Our Own Correspondent. Banging on about Sinan and his mosques in Istanbul being the model for St Peter’s dome, how all the Renaissance architects in Italy were drawing on his influence – somehow unconsciously !
Total bollocks. Most of them had never heard of him, they do not refer to him in their writings or correspondence. The greatest religious building until 1600 was the awesome Aya Sofia (Hagia Sofia) in Istanbul, built 1000 years earlier as a great Byszantine Christian monument. Aya Sofia knocks subsequent Islamic religious architecture (Cordoba, Granada, Fes etc) into a cocked hat.
Sinan in Istanbul copied from Hagia Sofia from that – and added minarets and tiles. Just go to Istanbul to see. The Ottomans wanted to match Justinian’s monument, after they took Constaninople.
Renaissance architecture in Italy (Palladio etc) was based on revival of Greek and Roman forms. Damn all to do with Islam. The Blue Mosque in the school of Sinan had not even been built until about 1640 – the Renaissance was well under a century before then.
The large Renaissance churches continued a tradition of Christian architecture including mosaic interiors unbroken from Roman times – from the Romanesque and Byzantine through the Norman eg Ravenna, Venice, Palermo. The dome in Florence had zilch to do with Islam – it was a novel design to achieve a greater span, but was based on domes from Roman times (Aya Sofia and the Pantheon being striking examples).
The Islamic world copied the dome from the Romans. That’s the truth that is obvious to anyone who has travelled a bit – but this is all part of the BBC trying to rewrite history. The full Wiki entries, for example on Hagia Sofia and the Blue Mosque (Sultan Ahmed Mosque) and on Sinan himself make it clear that Sinan drew ideas from the West – not the other way round.
Here are some photos I found, first of Hagia Sofia, then of the Blue Mosque copy built 1000 years later. (A non-arty friend of mine and I visited Istanbul last year. He and I were bored by the Blue Mosque. But even he – a total philistine ! – was blown away by Hagia Sofia, could hardly believe how old it was. In spite of the removal of most of the interior decoration it remains one of the most stunning buildings in the world)
http://www.richard-seaman.com/Travel/Turkey/Istanbul/index.html
The tosh also refers to San Giorgio Maggiore in Venice, designed by Palladio.
I see 4 main features there – a dome (ROMAN), a high belltower / campanile – following the practice of Pisa 400 years earlier which is repeated in so many ITALIAN cities – a portico of ROMAN columns, and a transept (ROMANESQUE/NORMAN) inside.
Not an ounce of Islamic influence.
How can the BBC get away with wasting our money on their false perspectives ?
Here is the Wiki on San Giorgio :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Giorgio_Maggiore
and sorry – I should have said that its portico is GREEK rather than Roman. Even an amateur like me can tell that the BBC and the Guardian are talking through their backsides. Again.