There is a view within Labour that their party should not have to compromise it’s ideals for the sake of winning a General Election. In other words, if the Labour Party becomes only a pressure group, then so be it.
The same can be said of the BBC. They exist within their own left-wing political utopia and don’t represent the views of the British population. Integrity therefore does not matter to them.
Alan, I’m sorry but you are wrong; the BBC spokesperson wasn’t lying.
“No EU money was used in the making of the programme being aired on the BBC” is factually correct. The EU grant was for translating the finished English language film (as shown by the BBC) into other languages.
Thus, whilst the foreign language versions received EU funding, the English version did not. This is old news. The TPA are desperately flogging a dead horse.
That is desperate misdirection. EU money went to the people who made that film. The money was allocated for that film. The BBC showed that film, therefore EU money was used for the making of the programme being aired on the BBC. Translating the film is a subset of the activities required in producing or “making” that film.
I have created many websites over the last 20 years. If I receive money purely to fund the cost of translating one of those websites, then that money comes under the allocation of cost of producing that website. Translation is NOT a separate activity from production of the finished product, but is a sub-set of production activity.
All programs are made with an eye on foreign sales. Certainly a program from an Independent producer is more likely to be made if the production company can demonstrate it can be part funded by overseas money. Hence why there are so many overseas companies credited at the end of BBC productions – also why so many productions are insipid and asinine, but that’s another story.
Why does the BBC accept any funding from the EU as it clearly compromises the BBC’s supposed impartiality ? Wherever the money is spent it releases an equivalent amount to fund EU propaganda.
This is the big argument over switching the Licence Fee into some sort of overall taxation (notwithstanding that some may not wish to access television AT ALL but will still end up paying) because the BBC will always be dependent on the Party in government to maintain the payment, increase the payment or make changes including terminating the arrangement. The provider > consumer relationship changes.
That apart, just taking money (especially when you do not really have need of it with £3.6bn guaranteed income) must compromise the BBC however ‘arms length’ the transaction may be.
“Left Hand, let me introduce you to Right Hand. You don’t seem to have met, much less know what you are each doing!”
Its desperate stuff, and symptomatic of a large organisation with multiple viewpoints.
Its just a shame that in this instance, the organisation in question is the country’s largest communication/ broadcasting company, and that we have become used to this kind of behaviour.
MarkyMarkNov 1, 15:02 Weekend 1st November 2025 All Saints Let us all stop funding UK terrorism! It would seem Khalid Masood (Westminster Attack 22.03.2017 5 Innocents Killed) was on…
MarkyMarkNov 1, 15:01 Weekend 1st November 2025 All Saints During the legal battle for the disclosure of MPs’ expenses, it was revealed that some of Tony Blair’s paper expense…
FlotsamNov 1, 15:01 Weekend 1st November 2025 All Saints There will be someone with sign boards saying “Clap Now”, “Boo Now”, “Cheer Now” etc in English and Urdu
MarkyMarkNov 1, 14:59 Weekend 1st November 2025 All Saints The former prime minister is reporting potholes in her constituency. Pic: Simon Dudley [img]https://e3.365dm.com/19/09/1600×900/skynews-theresa-may-maidenhead_4768296.jpg?20190908032139[/img] https://news.sky.com/story/pothole-pm-theresa-may-resumes-local-duties-in-maidenhead-11804768
MarkyMarkNov 1, 14:58 Weekend 1st November 2025 All Saints [img]https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7ec14bf4bb8ad486d8c49c5c9499ee6a7b23315c696a85e9bad7cdff8506e065.jpg[/img] https://biasedbbc.org/blog/2018/11/05/start-the-week-open-thread-5-november-2018/comment-page-5/#comment-951516 Welby VERSES all Islamists … UK 2018 Home Office, UK Security … Islamist …. Sajid Javid. London Mayor,…
MarkyMarkNov 1, 14:57 Weekend 1st November 2025 All Saints Keir Starmer has stated that Britain “fiercely” protects free speech, calling it a “founding value,” but also that there are…
Richard PinderNov 1, 14:38 Weekend 1st November 2025 All Saints Nuremberg Code Society – News On 20th August 2022, a group of international speakers traveled to Nuremberg to commemorate the…
moggiemooNov 1, 14:14 Weekend 1st November 2025 All Saints They probably had to have enough people there, that could speak English, so they could choreograph the audience reaction.
Up2snuffNov 1, 13:54 Weekend 1st November 2025 All Saints TOADY Watch #1 – its Climate Change innit …. The BBC just had to re-inforce the narrative. Hurricane Melissa was…
But at least they did with the by now renowned BBC integrity. Apparently. A BBC spokesperson has said…
There is a view within Labour that their party should not have to compromise it’s ideals for the sake of winning a General Election. In other words, if the Labour Party becomes only a pressure group, then so be it.
The same can be said of the BBC. They exist within their own left-wing political utopia and don’t represent the views of the British population. Integrity therefore does not matter to them.
The fact that the BBC lied (what’s new) is supported here.
“The BBC denied ‘The Great European Disaster Movie’ was EU-funded: that was untrue”
http://www.conservativehome.com/leftwatch/2015/08/the-bbc-denied-the-great-european-disaster-movie-was-eu-funded-that-was-untrue.html
Alan, I’m sorry but you are wrong; the BBC spokesperson wasn’t lying.
“No EU money was used in the making of the programme being aired on the BBC” is factually correct. The EU grant was for translating the finished English language film (as shown by the BBC) into other languages.
Thus, whilst the foreign language versions received EU funding, the English version did not. This is old news. The TPA are desperately flogging a dead horse.
http://wp.me/p5QbXs-aM
That is desperate misdirection. EU money went to the people who made that film. The money was allocated for that film. The BBC showed that film, therefore EU money was used for the making of the programme being aired on the BBC. Translating the film is a subset of the activities required in producing or “making” that film.
I have created many websites over the last 20 years. If I receive money purely to fund the cost of translating one of those websites, then that money comes under the allocation of cost of producing that website. Translation is NOT a separate activity from production of the finished product, but is a sub-set of production activity.
The BBC lied. The TPA are telling the truth.
Not quite Jason.
All programs are made with an eye on foreign sales. Certainly a program from an Independent producer is more likely to be made if the production company can demonstrate it can be part funded by overseas money. Hence why there are so many overseas companies credited at the end of BBC productions – also why so many productions are insipid and asinine, but that’s another story.
This horse still requires a little more flogging.
Why does the BBC accept any funding from the EU as it clearly compromises the BBC’s supposed impartiality ? Wherever the money is spent it releases an equivalent amount to fund EU propaganda.
Exactly Grant.
The EU is a political organisation campaigning for its survival and ought not be funding programs fluffing its worth.
Scribbling, yes the EU and the BBC have a lot in common !
This is the big argument over switching the Licence Fee into some sort of overall taxation (notwithstanding that some may not wish to access television AT ALL but will still end up paying) because the BBC will always be dependent on the Party in government to maintain the payment, increase the payment or make changes including terminating the arrangement. The provider > consumer relationship changes.
That apart, just taking money (especially when you do not really have need of it with £3.6bn guaranteed income) must compromise the BBC however ‘arms length’ the transaction may be.
“Left Hand, let me introduce you to Right Hand. You don’t seem to have met, much less know what you are each doing!”
Its desperate stuff, and symptomatic of a large organisation with multiple viewpoints.
Its just a shame that in this instance, the organisation in question is the country’s largest communication/ broadcasting company, and that we have become used to this kind of behaviour.
It should be: “left hand, let me introduce to even lefter hand”.