The BBC is an undemocratic, rampaging beast that is pretty much unaccountable and has been given carte blanche to do as it pleases, politicians too afraid to make the necessary changes to it, preferring instead to tinker around the edges…..hence we get no real, meaningful change to the method of financing the BBC and more importantly we get no change to its highly politicised, left-wing world view of how things should be.
I believe that the BBC is one of the most important institutions in the United Kingdom.
It is an intrinsic part of our democracy.
It delivers education and deep joy and stimulation to 97 percent of the population every month.
It would be crazy to damage, undermine or deflate what we have.
Part of the democratic process? An organisation that attempts to close down debate on climate change, on immigration, on Europe, on Islam, on the Middle East. An organisation that tries to shut parties like UKIP out of the political argument and actively worked to destroy ‘unacceptable’ organisations like the EDL …and has presenters who often express the desire for a Chinese, authoritarian type government that ‘gets things done’…ie without having the inconvenience of having to get the approval of the people.
No not part of the democratic process….or not one that facilitates democracy but rather ‘poisons the well’.
Cohen reels off a list of BBC programmes that he believes illustrate the importance of the BBC to life in the UK, nay the world, and says…
No broadcaster in the world provides this range, this quality, this commitment to all audiences.
Well, I suspect Sky, or even YouTube, might argue with that.
He comes to an end with a request that other Media groups stop criticising the BBC…
Of course, you will always hold us to account – and so you should.
But….I feel confident you will agree that a BBC that can flourish in a world of globalised media companies is the right thing for the UK and the right thing for audiences.
Perhaps this is time for a little less of the critical friend and a bit more of the friend.
That’ll be the BBC that tried to close down its political and commercial rival News International and crushes local news and rival magazine publishers.
With friends like Cohen whispering sweet nothings in your ear I’d buy my own drinks and keep one eye open all night.
Deep joy and stimulation to one and all this winter holiday!!
Utter rubbish Cohen.
This is 2014 not 1956, the world is so far removed from the days of just BBC and commercial television.
You have systematically undermined and poisoned democracy in Britain for the last 35 years.
If you think you are delivering ‘deep joy’ to 97% of the population then you demonstrate how deluded you and all the other bloated fat cats at the BBC are.
The only people holding the BBC to account are those in the media who can see it for what it is, because as sure as the Pope is Catholic the BBC Trust won’t be doing it. Time and time again, at the merest whiff of criticism, they demonstrate a propensity to leap into bed with the BBC.
They always claim to be the ‘envy of the world’ (I’m afraid that has yet to filter through to the part of North America where I live) so if that’s the case then the BBC will have no objection to becoming a subscription or pay per view. After all, everyone will be flocking to sign up to ‘the envy of the world’ won’t they. Won’t they??
TPO,
Exactly. If the BBC truly believes its own spin then it need not fear being subjected to true market forces. Just you try stopping the British public willingly throwing its money at the BBC.
If Cohen and the other Gramscis at the Beeb would like to list their pet causes we could send the licence fee money directly to them .
“This commitment to audiences”
True . A Question Time audience would endorse that .
“No broadcaster in the world …..”
….. forces you to buy their particular flavours of propaganda.
The sooner the Telly Tax is abolished, the better.
Does Sir Terry Pratchett know this about one of his characters???? Sorry I’ve got my silly head on.
All we are suggesting here, is that if the BBC is so loved by everyone, why does the BBC resist a voluntary subscription?
Why do they instead, regard the abolition of an immoral type of forced subscription, as a disaster, that would destroy the BBC?
The contradictions do not make any sense, unless the BBC thinks that right-wing people would not pay to watch a left-wing Media organisation, and left-wing people would not be able to afford the voluntary subscription rate.
Was it not the loathsome but street savvy Alistair Campbell who identified that when the back room boys become the story, the jig is up?
First Ian Katz, who now defines Newsnight; not in good way. Evan, Kirsty, Emily, Russell… all reduced to hapless puppets in the hands of a kid given the keys to the toy store.
And now Mr. Cohen.
All he seems to do is blunder around ranting at disloyal staff and muttering darkly about other Capo di Capos not according His empire due respect.
He comes across as a total, deranged thug.
If there is not a Downfall spoof of this character soon, I’ll be amazed.
“Capo di Capo”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2861524/Stop-having-BBC-chief-s-whinge-critics-Christmas-TV-repeats-huge-salaries-savaged.html
Top comment:
‘D.D., Northants,
The BBC is a company in the same way the Mafia is a company, secretive, opaque and raises it’s revenue by demanding money with menaces.
And this is who is running the state news offering?
‘‘The BBC is a great British company, not a Government department. We need it to flourish and continue to be the spark that lights a thousand creative fires.’
It’s stated funded Danno, so that means you are paid by, and report to the people… via Government, like any other public sector entity. Or should be.
‘Mr Cohen’s tone became angrier when he took to Twitter after the event and attacked individual journalists for criticising the BBC. ‘
Any troublesome priests he asked to be rid of too, while anyone was at it? Got the Anger, no real evidence of management at all.
But fear not, our elected leaders are on it…
‘Could we please have a debate on the BBC getting back to its remit and charter on public broadcasting…
Mr Hague refused the request but added: ‘I’m sure – well, I hope – they will be listening to what you say in the BBC.’
I am sure – well I know, they will have 141, 147, 210… 20,000 listening, and not one paying a damn bit of attention, William the Ineffectual.
“Capo di Capo”
‘….he took to Twitter after the event and attacked individual journalists for criticising the BBC’
Had a look at his and his sparring partners’ twitter feeds, given this is the font of all speaking to and hearing from the nation as far as Danny and the Dreamers are concerned.
Channelling his evident hero Mark Thompson in all ways, from the 20’s anarchist look to the oddly selective memory flashes, I see he has pummeled a meek Mirror into submission.
Other than that most of his feed (when not on football) is RTing the BBC Press Office who RT him back. Very intimate. Pharaohic even.
Danny Cohen retweeted
Matthew
@MattACampbell
Nice to see @DannyCohen taking no prisoners with his defence of the #BBC this evening. Proud to be part of #AuntieBeeb.
No, nice one, Matt! pass Go, pick up a £350kpa directorship that brown-noser!
Elizabeth @legsidelizzy Dec 3
@DannyCohen @MirrorTom @mirrorjeffers it’s 2 quid a week for shed loads of brilliant tv and radio. Seriously. TWO QUID
That’s too much, Liz. TOO MUCH. If you don’t like it or want it or need it.
But look out Hugs, a new girl (BBC county cricket broadcaster. Cricket writer: Guardian, the People. Have unhealthy obsessions with Juan Roman Riquelme,shoes and tea. Views mine etc etc) is in town.
Despite the fight to be Danny’s consigliere, the actual numbers engaging on twitter struggle to reach half a dozen (Dez gets more here), and other than Danny pushing his own posts, the rest seem to be BBC sycophants, so no change there.
When he’s not tweeting about the lazy journalism everyone else practices except the BBC when having a go… er… holding power to account.
Danny Cohen @DannyCohen Dec 3
@mirrorjeffers Poor show Mark. Standard, lazy, annually repeated newspaper stories about the BBC. Tens of millions will enjoy Xmas on BBC
And in the exchanges he gets faux placatory when he gets his homage from the uppity, humbled Mirror editor… ‘no hard feelings’.
I can see this nutcase capping a relative (he RT’s his wife RT’ing him, so watch out if you are slow with the respect, love) and standing over the corpse saying ”Sorry… just business. Nothing personal”.
Seems others have noticed:
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/godfathers.html?
‘..Special Assistant Thea Rogers, ex-producer of BBC Political Editor Nick Robinson, ex-girlfriend of BBC Director of Strategy and Digital James Purnell, and late night confidant of Craig Oliver, former BBC editor-turned-No 10 adviser, suggests..’
Cosy.
He even has bunkers.
With skills acquired at the feet of Alastair Campbell
Reassuring.
‘…get Danny Cohen off Twitter..
Oh, noes, the BBC truly needs more views his own.
Cohen gets a thouroughly good kicking in the Times this morning from Ross Clark in the Thunderer column.
Covers BBC bias and censorship too.
Worth a read !
(paywalled)
Not keen on paywalls.
Is this it?:
http://www.thegwpf.com/ross-clark-why-did-the-bbc-ban-nigel-lawson-from-debating-climate-change/
‘I can guess how John Humphrys would react if George Osborne made an emotional appeal for the Today programme to become “a little less of a critical friend and a bit more of a friend”.
Petard much, Danny?
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2014-12-03/cherish-the-corporation-before-its-too-late-says-bbc-tv-boss
‘But why does it think its own people deserve only adulation, not scrutiny? ‘
Because, currently, they know they are unaccountable and can demand to question anyone and refuse to answer any questions of them.
‘I contacted your complaints department about that in July but have yet to receive a reply’
Yes, it happens a lot.
And that… is propaganda backed by censorship, pure and simple.
Hilarious irony that you are not keen on paywalls either!
Not keen, as for convenience I prefer a commercial model that avoids messing about with subscriptions. Especially when referring to a story and/or linking a URL on a forum. And eyeballs are a viable market force to reward or avoid.
But at least subscriptions do still represent a choice; one the BBC denies people, though I understand they are going full commercial in many places, using the competitive advantage of UK licence fee payer unique funding as a foundation.
Not too hilarious at all. Ironic your first outing in a new incarnation has presented the opportunity to point all this out.
Any snappy one liner input on at least some of the other topic points raised on this thread?
There’s an article in the guardian about the times’ online business model today which highlights the dilemma you mention, balancing profit and influence:
http://gu.com/p/44va5
As I’ve said elsewhere – using the same alias, I’m not a troll – I regard the BBC as biased in favour of small c conservatism, rather than any particular political flavour, and represents the establishment of the day whatever that is. Under labour there was a bias in favour of that party, at the beginning of the coalition the bias was in their favour but certainly more skewed towards Cameron / Osborne than further to the right as the false ‘balance ‘ it is supposed to have tends to squeeze out non – mainstream views outside the establishment the right and left.
As I said lower down the thread in relation to bbc comedy output, the BBC seems to believe it should produce lowest common denominator stuff which offends few and excites no one rather than the genuine public service approach of creating diverse minority interest programming which overall caters for everyone and enables us all to discover more about each other in the process. It does this a bit better in radio, but even there could do a lot more. But squeezing or eliminating the funding would only reduce diversity of programmes further and that would be a retrograde step imho.
What I find more depressing than the Beeb’s bias is its very poor program output particularly TV which apparently is so vital to british culture and the “envy of the world” (much like the bloated NHS). For £4bn a year I would expect a raft of superb programs not junk like Strictly, The Apprentice, East Enders, Graham Norton, etc, etc, etc.
The Beeb nicely highlights its current lack of decent Comedy programs with their Christmas “ad” showing previous comedies ,with the exception of an old Outnumbered, all from the 70s and 80s.
Anyone looking forward to the Citizen Khan Christmas Special?
Detectorists was amazing, in a very understated English way. I agree about Citizen Khan, but then lazy formulaic sitcoms have always had an audience and that one is no exception, I can’t reasonably object to it though I’d never watch it. I do agree that there is a lot of junk, but this is primarily due to pressure to pander to a mass audience rather than proper public service broadcasting to niche audiences of all kinds – just as a national mail service must deliver to *all* addresses, a national broadcasting service must provide for all tastes and interests, not just the majority (which can be well served by commercial broadcasters).
Yes I enjoyed very much Detectorists, particularly as I’m also a detectorist, although in 35 years of detecting I have never met a BME detectorist.
I would though disagree that it needs to make loads of programs for the masses as commercial TV and radio already provides this.
Yes that is the point I’m making too – schedule filling ‘content’ such as the endless ‘reality’ formulae are no public service at all, we are all minorities of some kind or another, or at least have minority interests, like detectoring, it’s much more interesting to make programmes to reflect this rather than patronisingly regarding people as a dumb proletariat, and that would be a genuine public service worth the licence fee.
Shame this thread is dropping off the timeline. It seems important that the Head of BBC is a grudge-toting, delusional megalomaniac, with a chip on his shoulder large enough to feed all Ireland for a decade.
Others have shared elsewhere, but to get these references in one place:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11273181/The-BBC-vs-the-media-are-they-telling-the-whole-truth.html
Nifty fisk of what management calls astounding uncuriosity or selective Alzheimers, editorial sees as ‘truth won’t fit’ omission, and straighter talkers call ‘what the BBC doesn’t mention’.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/11273925/Under-siege-the-biased-BBC-fights-for-its-life.html
‘it seems that the Hall-appointed chief James Harding can find money to hire any number of new senior colleagues, some of them without an open recruitment process’. That’s the one the BBC rules require.
Presumably the kind of question Danny is not too lazy to answer?
A key comment in caution (after a BBC H/T):
Simxn Sguest •
The worry is that the TV Tax will go and the government will fund the BBC directly instead. Every taxpayer will then be responsible for it’s continuation and have ‘absolutely’ no say in the matter.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/04/guardian-view-government-attacks-bbc-stand-firm
Predictable ovine support. I like this zigger as others zag:
oldoddjobs sheepshank
05 December 2014 12:22am
Recommend 2 (not many, oddly)
So, neoliberals want to do away with the BBC……and they’re the only ones allowed on the BBC………yet I have never seen anyone on the BBC argue for its abolition…hmmm
If you’re on the left, the BBC is a right-wing propaganda pump
If you’re on the right, the BBC is a cultural Marxist nest of vipers
Some would conclude that it must be doing its job well, by satisfying no one. I’d rather it earned its own money.
Most I know frustrated with the BBC’s lack of accuracy, objectivity and integrity would be happy simply to have the choice of opting out. Oddly, those most vocal on the BBC being not enough left in attitude are those screaming most if that simple compromise solution is suggested.
So, they think the BBC is biased, but not enough to cease being imposed on one and all, so long as it suits their ideology even further. Uh-huh.
And for ‘balance’:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/isabel-hardman/2014/12/grumpy-osborne-complains-about-hyperbolic-bbcquestions-about-cuts/
Not too sure this lady is the most professionally competent pebble in the rock box. She rather blew a point on internet memes by lazy research biting her back recently.
A perfect BBC candidate then.