271 Responses to MONDAY OPEN THREAD…

  1. David Preiser (USA) says:

    BBC News producer (US & UK) Katie Townsend on gender issues:


    • Dysgwr_Cymraeg says:

      Why dont all these folk who think Sweden is awesome just bugger off and live there?


      • Lobster says:

        Probably because Sweden seems to have embraced the followers of the peaceful religion even more than we have, and they might have to face the reality of that if Stockholm doesn’t have an “Islington” to escape to.


        • David Preiser (USA) says:

          On the plus side, though, some cities are getting rid of their Jews. No nefarious Jewish Lobby for the Beeboids to worry about.


      • Thoughtful says:

        “Why dont all these folk who think Sweden is awesome just bugger off and live there?”

        Have you seen the rate of tax that socialism requires to run it, and what that would mean for the average Beeboid salary?

        That’s why they look from afar & coo about how wonderful it is, but won’t go to live there!


    • Dave s says:

      A whole new meaning to Stockholm syndrome. These people are insane.
      I mean really insane.
      I am a simple man. What the hell is gender neutral?
      It is meaningless gibberish. Words for the sake of it. A contradiction in terms. News speak from 1984.
      It is corrupting and decadent.
      As you can gather it really makes me wild.


      • Arthur Penney says:

        It’s purely a marketing tool – to get parents to view more areas (toys) in the supermarket as they try and find the right toys for their kids. – Literally window-dressing.

        (Boys will always go for combative and competitive toys whilst girls will go for co-operation.)


    • chris says:

      When I become Prime minister, my first decision will be to decide on whether to nuke Sweden or Pakistan first.
      Second decision will be to decide on the order in which I will launch a mass bombing raid on Birmingham, Luton, Reading and Bradford.
      Third decision will be to fence London up, set howitzers around the M25, and set them to constant fire until the place is flattened.


  2. Maturecheese says:

    This post I made Re Turing was removed as it broke the BBC house rules Can’t think why.


    Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing


    He was a remarkable man and contributed greatly to our victory (some victory though) BUT that was the law at the time and he chose to break it. It it a good thing that Homosexuals are no longer persecuted but that doesn’t mean it should be celebrated and promoted like it is today. We ditch our Christian values at our peril.


    • Uncle Bup says:

      Funny how they wet themselves in desperation to defend Anjem Choudary’s right to free speech.

      *Your* right to free speech? Not so much.


    • Dave s says:

      You spoke the truth. That is not acceptable to the BBC.
      The BBC has the truth. It is some weird liberal fantasy they all subscribe to.
      Is there nobody in that vast conglomeration of people who wishes to state real words that really mean something and to look at the reality of the world.?
      This is what the 21st century is bringing to England. Censorship, evasions and lies. Sounds like the first line of a song.


    • Arthur Penney says:

      I feel that the answer is in your post “he chose to break it”.

      Most scientists these days agree on sexuality (being attracted to male/ female) is induced to a significant extent on the presence or absence of oestrogen/ testosterone in a uterine environment.

      It is no co incidence that the apparent increase in homosexuality/ gender- bending is happening at the same time as hormones have entered our food cycle.

      Prosecuting someone for being homosexual is probably equal with prosecuting them for having red hair.


      • Stewart says:

        That is true, but the true forgotten hero of Bletchley park is Tommy Flowers
        How is it the BBC are committed to ensuring we ,rightly, remember Turin but not flowers?
        Could it be that one was homosexual and one wasn’t? Or is purely old fashioned patrician class snobbery?


        • John Anderson says:

          Yes, Alan Turing and his exploits are well known – but Flowers truly is a forgotten hero, years and years before his time.

          When the entire Post Office /BT machine finally got round to designing its stored-programme-control switching, it failed – and squandered several hundred millions in the process.


      • Dave s says:

        If the BBC censored because of ” he chose to break it’ then that is rather odd. Whatever your view of the matter now Turing did choose to break the law. He exercised his free will.
        However I doubt that was the reason. The BBC censors because it can and is answerable to nobody.


        • Lobster says:

          Unless any comment is libelous or in any way illegal, there can be no justification for them to censor anything. Maturecheese was merely expressing an opinion, and speaking as a gay man I found nothing offensive in it.


    • DICK R says:

      You don’t need to be religious to be repulsed by the act of sodomy !


  3. Thoughtful says:

    So Alan Turing has now been given a pardon for breaking laws which at the time were in effect.
    Can we now expect a pardon for Oscar Wilde who broke the same laws?

    Can we expect a pardon for the Pendle witches – who didn’t even commit the offence they were accused of.

    And while we’re at it let’s pardon Anne Boleyn in fact why not pardon everyone who was convicted prior to 1960 because we can’t actually be as certain of their guilt as we can today !

    A crazy precedent which should never have been set, and already the nutters are banging on the doors for more – give them that and they’ll want more still.

    A prime example of the thin end of an indefensible wedge.


    • chrisH says:

      What exactly DID Alan Turing do, yo get his conviction?
      Are we talking Elton or Savile?
      Thought the BBC would be keen to tell us…their silence makes me suspicious.


      • Milverton says:

        I’ve seen or heard nothing at all which suggests he was a paedophile.

        It seems to me that regardless of his proclivities Turing was a great man, and deserves our recognition and thanks.

        Whether that is a Royal Pardon is perhaps less clear. He’s already had a stamp, but a more prominent statue, this time in London, or at some point in the future a place on a banknote would seem commensurate with his achievements.

        We don’t choose our national heroes based on their perceived weaknesses, but on real their strengths.


  4. Alex says:

    As Muslims terrorize Christians worldwide, the BBC are trying every word-configuration possible to avoid mentioning the two obvious words, Muslim and Murder, even in Welby’s speech they obfuscate and fanny about.



  5. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Don’t tell the bigots at the BBC, but millions of people they hate in the US are enjoying A&E’s Duck Dynasty marathon today.

    I’m sure to a man (or woman, or transgendered person), BBC employees will claim that every moment spent watching the show is a stance in favor of homophobia and hate speech and for Christians forcing their views on others, “or else”.

    Meanwhile, less extremist people in the TV industry are saying A&E screwed up by letting Phil Robertson talk to GQ in the first place, and then by pretending to be shocked, shocked that the old-school Christian they’ve been filming turned out to have an old-school Christian belief they didn’t like.

    “A rookie mistake.” That’s how one TV industry veteran who’s put in time dealing with rogue reality stars described A&E’s handling of its Duck Dynasty nightmare.

    “It’s very difficult to keep these people in check then they get famous,” the exec noted, in A&E’s defense. Particularly when the star already has amassed a large pile of money making bird-calling devices for hunters, believes he has a religious calling, and isn’t afraid to lose his TV series. A&E is charting new territory, execs with whom we spoke acknowledged. “You’ve got an immovable object who actually believes he has God on his side. He’s a multimillionaire who lives in a swamp!” one industry image specialist acknowledged. “I don’t’ think he gives a flying fuck whether or not [A&E] agrees with him. I don’t think there’s any fear in this guy.” Ditto the rest of the Robertson family, who quickly issued a statement suggesting they will not do the show without Phil.

    Our panel of industry execs is still scratching their heads in re why the A&E let Phil Robertson, a guy whose religious beliefs were well known to the network, within 100 yards of a GQ interview.

    “Who the hell let them talk to GQ in the first place?” one veteran wondered. “This is their biggest show. Are they going to get a bigger audience by talking to some snarky reporter from GQ? Where is the upside? There is none. Zero.”

    Chimed in another: “GQ is not a Duck Dynasty-friendly place, and [A&E] knew they had talent that talks and goes off the reservation. What the fuck you gonna get from GQ? It’s not going to get you a new audience. Then they left him alone with the reporter.” (A&E had a rep on site, but the reporter nonetheless managed to squeeze in some alone time with Phil, during which he cut loose, according to media reports).

    Robertson, on the other hand, is guilty only of consistent behavior. “He has not flinched. He’s very consistent in his opinion. He has gone off [A&E’s] script, but he’s perfectly on-script for him,” said one TV exec. “There was some sincerity to the show – unless it was all bullshit. Turns out, it wasn’t.”

    In addition to Know Your Star, execs we spoke with said the basic tenets of Surviving Reality TV Series Hits also include Know Your Show, Know Your Audience — and, last but not least, Get Out Of Your Own Way (aka, Hollywood and New York Are Not the Norm in the Country).

    A&E does not appear to have done well on these other points either, according to our experts.

    Duck Dynasty isn’t just another of the homespun reality TV shows about swamp people, trailer park people, pickers, hoarders, storage-locker openers, and coupon clippers that litter the TV landscape these days – it’s a religious parable, our pundits noted. “This is a show where, somewhere in every episode they’re saying grace,” noted one. “These people have a certain genuineness to them, even if they did agree to do a reality show.”

    This is why people like Rhys Hughes hate them. It doesn’t matter if they’re otherwise decent, law-abiding citizens. They have an unapproved thought, and must be destroyed. Remember, neither Phil Robertson nor any of the others on that show ever expressed ill will or anything else towards homosexual on air. Robertson was suspended and his supporters are being vilified for thoughtcrime.

    Fascists at the BBC support that. Any statement in support of Robertson’s suspension or in denigration of people who think he should not be suspended is a stance in support of persecuting someone for thoughtcrime.


  6. Dave s says:

    On this day of all days I should not have to mention this. I listened to the R4 news this morning commenting on the bomb attacks on Christians in Iraq. The diistinct impression I got was that this was a result of communal violence and that Muslims also were the victims. This is true but not at the hands of the tiny Iraqi Christian community.
    Such bias by omission is more than the truth can bear. Shame on the man or woman who wrote the newscast.


  7. George R says:

    BBC-NUJ & its pro-Islamising TURKEY ‘reporting,’ censors this:-

    1.)” Conspiratorial minds, authoritarian politics”


    We only get this BBC-NUJ version:-

    2.)”Defiant Turkish PM Erdogan in major reshuffle”



  8. Guest Who says:

    Looking at the schedule, it seems that despite cancelling the licence dd, we were able watch the BBC today. Albeit as it was some 30 years ago. So no great loss then.


  9. Guest Who says:

    A Boxing Day treat in the Graun, when a BBC employee tells us what we want….
    “‘We licence-fee payers are a diverse bunch, we want choice”
    Guessing the choice to feel that little to none of the output appeals or serves, and hence to opt out of paying, is not included?


    • Dave s says:

      Sad really and most of the comments are sad as well. Just sell it off and have done with it. The new owners will hopefully reinvigorate a dying carcass of drivel.


      • Mike says:

        Reading the comments on Guardian’s CIF I’m not sure that the constant reference to the BBC being right wing is a policy of “say it often enough and some will believe” or the stance of the contributors is so far to the left that they honestly believe it themselves!


        • David Preiser (USA) says:

          It’s the same mindset as those who claim the BBC is Zionist. If the BBC doesn’t openly condemn Israel every time as a genocidal evil entity which should never have existed, they’ll call it biased in favor of Israel.

          In this case, if the BBC gives a moment of air time to a Tory or doesn’t openly condemn all Conservative policies, it must be Right-wing.

          The comments you’re reading there are what the BBC claims as proof of their overall balance and impartiality. They get complaints from both sides, you see. A couple idiots even lumped Dimbleby in with Harriet Harman’s so-called enemies from the Right.


        • Guest Who says:

          As you say.
          Bit disappointed as of late some media CiFers have shown a refreshing resistance to being Whipped into ra-ra support by a BBC employee like this, but seem to have reverted more to tribal fealty here.
          Maybe it’s the season to suck up.


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      If your best defense of value for money is buying foreign productions, you’re not doing it right. Any commercial outlet can do that if the ratings are there. This could even be used as more evidence that the BBC unfairly crushes competition by being able to crowd out rivals for picking up these shows. If somebody suggests getting rid of BBC3 as well, is somebody going to bemoan the loss of Family Guy?

      License fee payers are indeed a diverse bunch. That’s one reason why BBC News and management hold you in contempt.


      • Guest Who says:

        The logic fails seem to be getting close to matching the bonkers nature of default delusions that are trotted out every single time by a diminishing DOTI collective.
        Mind you, having outsourced most ‘news’ acquisition and re-dissemination to a variety of free US-based aggregators, only with a compelled £145.50 handling fee slapped on for UK residents to fund, anything is possible.


  10. DickMart says:

    And where, O BBC, is this news (also reported prominently in the Times)? Oh, of course, I forgot, it could be construed as good news for the Tories…



    • Maturecheese says:

      If having a massively bloated population of all kinds means economic success you can keep it thanks. It means we will have a sweatshop economy. Hardly good news.


  11. George R says:

    For veteran Beeboid, Hampstead HARRABIN blowhard:-

    “£30million for wind turbines that don’t work when it’s windy: Cost is £25million higher than last year and paid for by household bills.
    National Grid is unable to cope with extra power produced
    At the start of September, around 40 wind farm firms were paid £2.4million.
    Another windy weekend in August saw £3.1million handed over”

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2529297/Title-goes-here.html#ixzz2oaCOfXUZ
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


    • uncle bup says:

      I believe we shall shortly be paying Eire £2 billion a year for ‘stealth wind’.

      That is where we get the (very expensive) electricity but the bog-trotters get the wind-farms.

      Two bill a year a lot less noticeable to voters than yet another wind-farm.

      It’s how Wavy Davy does things.



  12. Umbongo says:

    Just to note that guest editor Tim Berners-Lee gave Steve Jones yet another opportunity to lie on Today during a cod-discussion about science and the BBC. Jones (unchallenged natch) took that opportunity to repeat his slanders of the scientists and others opposed to the CAGW fraud by accusing them of “denying climate change” and, further, implied by example that they are “flat-earthers”.
    Maybe it’s about time a scientist or even a competent journalist – employed by Panorama perhaps (a bit of a stretch there, I know) – re-visited Jones’s celebrated work on snails. Presumably Jones’s unyielding support for the “science” underlying CAGW – and the wholesale betrayal therefrom of the practice of science – is an indication of his mindset on all matters scientific as well as facts which happen to contradict his political world-view. If so, this can only create doubt in those of us outside the “science is settled” loop concerning the way he applies to his day job as a geneticist his understanding of how science should be practised.
    BTW I’m not alleging that his pioneering work with snails is not of the highest quality. Obviously humans are more complicated than that. After all Heisenberg, one of history’s greatest scientists, was a faithful citizen of nazi Germany (and no, I’m not implying that Jones is a “nazi”). All that occurs to me to ask is that if someone who, in the cause of CAGW, is prepared by implication to traduce eminent scientists like, for instance, Freeman Dyson (a scientist whose distinction makes Jones the science equivalent of Dyson’s Groom of the Stool) then in what other causes is he prepared to lie?


    • Guest Who says:

      They’ve just posted their FaceBook feed on this.
      Already not going too well.
      Seems that inventing the WWW doesn’t buy you a pass from coming out with some daft stuff elsewhere.
      And speaking of the BBC and sciencey stuff, there was this too:

      ‘Science and environment news highlights of 2013
      The BBC’s Paul Rincon looks back at a memorable year of science and environment headlines.’

      The link takes you here:
      Though anyone who bothers would likely be the same who reckon they can get up to speed on International geo-politics via an article on William Hague’s favourite room in ‘Heat’ magazine.


  13. DICK R says:

    Why as the BBC sent a reporter to some mosque in London to cover the funeral of the muslim doctor killed in Syria , are they trying to whip up a muslim hate fest in E. London directed at the British Government ?


  14. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Another White House press release posing as a BBC News Online article.

    US healthcare insurance help offered in run-up to deadline

    This is a straight-up press release from the White House. All pointing to how the government is here to help those in need, precious little on why it’s come to this. Sure, the BBC mentions that there have been “technical issues”, but it’s pure White House propaganda to also blame “high demand”, without qualification. Everybody is being forced to use it, which isn’t exactly “demand”. It’s “command”.

    There’s so much missing in this piece it’s pathetic. They list “setbacks”, but what they list are merely the result of setbacks, not the problems themselves, which are legion. But that’s BBC News on US issues for you, especially when it comes to their beloved Obamessiah and His policies, which BBC journalists support for ideological reasons.

    When it all really hits the fan next year, those who rely on the BBC for their news will be shocked. Just wait until people start dying or having serious problems because they’re no longer covered and can’t afford any of these new plans or treatment is restricted. Just wait until senior citizens start suffering because of cuts in Medicare to subsidize these new plans. Just wait until people find out how many doctors and health care providers simply won’t accept any of these ObamaCare plans because they can’t afford to say in business if they accept the low, low payments. Just wait until insurance companies start asking for bailout money because the law they helped write out of sheer greed was based in part on false assumptions and lies they were fed by Democrats and Big Pharma. And the BBC will probably continue to be dishonest about the whole thing, because they support the policy and the President’s goals.


  15. Leha says:

    Dan Snow’s Colorado River Jollies.

    I expect he will be rewriting history as usual.


  16. David Preiser (USA) says:

    So, do we blame George Bush for this like the BBC does with any Mohammedan violence everywhere else?

    Egyptian Bus Hit by Bomb Blast
    Attack Raises Concerns Violence is Turning Toward Civilians

    A bomb exploded near a municipal bus early Thursday, injuring five people in what appeared to be the first terrorist attack intentionally targeting civilians since Egypt’s military ousted the country’s first freely elected president in July.

    The attack occurred at about 9:30 a.m. local time in Nasr City, a large district of Eastern Cairo that has become the epicenter of the political struggle between the military and the supporters of deposed President Mohammed Morsi.

    If the BBC is going to blame the usual suspect – US/UK foreign policy – they’ll have to blame The Obamessiah for creating the mess in Egypt. He and His Muslim Brotherhood-sympathizing advisers and ambassador worked to force Mubarak out before anything stable was put into place. He and His Muslim Brotherhood-sympathizing advisers and ambassador tried like hell to keep Morsi in power at all costs after he turned dictator and the Egyptian Army called time out. He and His Muslim Brotherhood-sympathizing advisers and ambassador have let the whole place fall apart because – allegedly – His wonderful smart diplomacy is not to interfere and to open dialogues with the worst actors. But that would be blaming Him for something and suggesting that one of His policies was wrong. Won’t happen at the BBC, unless it’s that rarest of occasions when Mardell criticizes military action, and even then he blames the ugly American public for forcing Him to act against His better judgment.

    For now, the BBC is blaming the Army and their crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood, stoking fears of a return to authoritarianism (they introduced that Narrative last week, linked in the sidebar). Hey, BBC, what did you call it when Morsi was assuming absolute power and cracking down on opponents? That didn’t make people worry about authoritarianism? Maybe eventually you’ll find one of your liberal Arab Spring darlings to condemn the violence against innocent civilians.

    Black & white BBC vision: Mubarak 2.0 on the horizon. They’ll probably go back to the old days and blame the Jewish Lobby for having the US prop up and pay off Egyptian military rule for keeping the peace with Israel.


  17. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Let me just warn people away from checking the US & Canada page for the rest of the day. Unless you want to read about the Passion of St. Edward, avoid.


  18. onlyne says:

    Floods and disconnected power supplies over Christmas for many. BBCTV News this evening, BBC reporter in Byfleet, Surrey, asking people about their experiences. Every single person interviewed was “Asian”- that is BBC Asian, not Chinese or Malayan etc. Made me realise, when did I ever see a Polish immigrant (of whom there are a great many) being interviewed on the Beeb. But of course, the reporter is out there looking for people to interview – Poles are white, no chance of the reporter asking for thier opinions.


    • Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:

      You must have missed the supreme ‘floods’ interview on Christmas Day, when the bBBC managed to find an immigrant from South Sudan whose house in Dorset had been inundated!
      Although the reporter will doubtless score very highly with his Guardianista bosses for finding such a choice ‘interviewee’, the immigrant rather spoiled the ‘floods/ no electricity’ story by smiling and keeping saying that he thought there was no problem: he had no electricity in South Sudan either, and there he was in danger of being shot at.


  19. Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:

    I thought this would make a nice Christmas story, an energy company arranging, and paying (up to £40 per person), Christmas lunches in restaurants and pubs for customers without power. http://metro.co.uk/2013/12/24/energy-company-promises-free-christmas-meal-for-customers-without-power-4242340/. The ‘Good King Wenceslas’ analogy, or even links to Dickens’ ‘Christmas Carol’, seemed too good an opportunity to miss.
    But, apart from a one-line mention on a webpage (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25512391) the bBBC didn’t bother to interview anyone about it. Doubtless it would have spoiled the leftie agenda to broadcast a good-news story from an energy supplier. Or they couldn’t find any foreigners who were benefiting.


  20. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Another day, another biased Echo Chambers installment.

    Time up for 60 Minutes?

    Why has the editor decided to take notice at last that the venerable 60 Minutes is having some credibility problems? Because now even the Left is complaining.

    What most likely got Zurcher’s attention this time is the NY Times article he cites castigating the program for not being as aggressive lately, mostly in reaction to the recent climbdown they had to do about a special report about Benghazi where the reporter was misled by somebody claiming to have been an eyewitness. Never mind that the rest of her report seems to have stood up to scrutiny. The one element damns the whole thing, which has been attacked relentlessly by the Leftoid mainstream media. Why? Because it make the President and the President-in-waiting (Hillary Clinton) look bad. So it had to be stopped dead.

    That’s why all of a sudden the Left is angry at 60 Minutes. Not because of Steve Crawford’s series of fawning interviews with the President and other top Dem figures, and not because of the Palin bashing they used to do, or because of the subtle dirty tricks (well known to BBC producers and editors) like dredging up an old interview which supported the President’s foreign policy statement, shown alongside dual interviews with the President and Mitt Romney during the last election. No. The Left is now angry because 60 Minutes dared to try and make the case that there’s a Benghazi scandal (BBC: ZZZZ…..extremist websites obscure the facts….ZZZZzzzzz) and more recently appeared not to criticize the NSA harshly enough.

    As Zurcher himself explains:

    This caps a week during which the news programme has become a punching bag for both the left and the right.

    Hang on, I thought getting complaints from both sides was proof that they got it about right? Hello, BBC Complaints Dept.? Can I have a word, please?

    Zurcher presents the NY Times as evidence of Left-wing criticism of the show, so I guess the cat’s out of the bag on the Grey Lady’s bias now. The critical voices he presents are the NY Times, Reason, the National Review, and Politico. 2 Left, 1 Right, and 1 in the middle.

    It’s hard not to detect a certain amount of glee from conservatives on this topic, as they’ve long viewed 60 Minutes as having a left-leaning bias (of course, they feel that way about most of the mainstream media, but that’s beside the point).

    In particular, they cite a 60 Minutes II story in 2004 on President George W Bush’s Air National Guard service, in which the authenticity of a document used in the report was cast into doubt. The resulting scandal ended with the forced resignation of long-time CBS News reporter and network anchor Dan Rather (who continues to stand by the story).

    For the show also to have its credibility questioned from the left does not bode well. The clock is ticking for 60 Minutes to figure out how to recover.

    Notice Zurcher diminishing the claims that 60 Minutes has a liberal bias. Nothing to see here when it’s the Right complaining, but now that somebody on the Left has complained and they dared make a report which questioned The Obamessiah and Hillary, 60 Minutes suddenly has a reputation problem? If only we could use that argument against the BBC…..

    Zurcher’s bias on display once again. This Echo Chambers feature is an absolute joke.


  21. RCE says:

    Christmas University Challenge.

    With Mehdi fucking Hasan.

    They just can’t help it.


    • Guest Who says:

      If they have really re-engaged with Mr. Hasan, given his body of work to date, especially in the field of two-faced hypocrisy, the BBC has truly lost the freakin’ plot. Even further.


  22. thoughtful says:

    Top stories being pushed tonight other than the previous storm and the immanent one.
    Syrian Jihadist doctor funeral
    Boxing day hunt and the continuing class war, proving it was nothing to do with animal cruelty.
    How wonderful the BBC is taking 8 out of the top ten Xmas day programs (give us more money!).
    Boxing day sales – only ‘a little more spent’ than last year – doing down the economy !

    Nothing changes.


  23. Guest Who says:

    Atop the edifying spectacle of BBC top brass again waving their dirty frillies around, it is good to see the CiF crowd again less than impressed at the total shambles they all preside over has become.


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Oh, dear. Dyke is scared that the BBC will be accountable at long last to someone other than themselves? What a shame.

      Dyke actually looks better and better these days, compared to the clearly disastrous tenure of Mark Thompson, and now Lord Hall not doing anything to improve the situation in spite of his lofty promises. Although, come to think of it, his promises to fix the management structure as some sort of cure was a joke to begin with. I could be wrong, but I suspect Savile/McAlpine wouldn’t have unfolded quite like it did with him in charge. I can’t say it would have been done better, of course. It’s possible neither the Panorama report nor the spiked Newsnight one would have aired at all. And who knows what he would have done about Mark Byford, who allegedly was the wise hand who would have prevented disasters like that.

      But now the BBC might possibly fall under Ofcom’s supposedly watchful eye, Dyke and probably all the usual “Defend the National Treasure From Right-wing Enemies Waiting To Pounce” suspects will be out in force. Too late, people. Your tireless defense of the BBC enabled the rot to set in irreparably. If the powers that be at the BBC, the Trust, the media, and in Parliament (read: the modern elite class, which is a different order of things from the old-fashioned notions of upper class vs. lower class) had spent a fraction of the energy on making real fixes and improvements to the BBC that they did attacking all critics and proclaiming their eternal love for the National Treasure, things might possibly have turned out better.

      But, no. Their goal was to attack enemies rather than actually fix the BBC. As the sage says, Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

      The only drawback is that Ofcom will probably be equally useless when it comes to really nailing the BBC in a way that might fix the underlying disease.


      • Guest Who says:

        “The only drawback is that Ofcom will probably be equally useless when it comes to really nailing the BBC in a way that might fix the underlying disease.”

        I fear the nudging, by many, towards OFCOM goes beyond an unsurprising adherence to uselessness by the politico-media establishment, though this quango’s stellar record in sucking public money in to achieve little more than old boy network protection for the telecom industry is well established.
        Given the value of impartial oversight our most distrusted, opaque national treasure enjoys now, it is hard to see it being improved much by another safe pair of hands at the helm such as Mr. Richards.


  24. George R says:

    “Patten is a ‘busted flush’ says ex-BBC chief Dyke: Former director-general says broadcaster would be better off without trust chairman”

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2529723/Patten-busted-flush-says-ex-BBC-chief-Dyke-Former-director-general-says-broadcaster-better-without-trust-chairman.html#ixzz2ofU5HoY4


  25. Guest Who says:

    Telegraph TV & Radio (@Telegraph_TV)

    Sir Tim Berners-Lee banned from having atheist on Radio 4’s Thought for the Day (£) tgr.ph/19lLPb4
    Propaganda backed by censorship always attract some, especially those who can deny conversations from on high ever happened or cannot be recalled when held in the whispering corridors of the world’s least trusted and opaque broadcast monopoly.
    ‘Presenter Mishal Husain explained his plans had not been possible, because the slot is part of the BBC’s religious programming.’
    What Ms. Husain is comfortable with, and not, on religious grounds, is of course an interesting other story.
    The comment thread is interesting, if depressingly familiar.


  26. Philip says:

    Back to BBC business: Young Kirsty on Christmas (Dessert) Island Disks (Radio 4) Friday 27th has been forced again to interview another Labour closet feminist (amongst it’s own BBC staff – as a special Christmas bonus for BBC staff only). I could have easily turned her ‘off’ but gave her enough rope to describe the problems of being really, really ‘famous comedian’ like ‘Eric Morcambe’ she quotes: (Oh! the presure of being a famous PR executive), and of course it all about self doubt (which as listeners we really, really do doubt). Miranda Hart has clear ambitions of becoming the nations top female comedian (but lacking any natural talent) she struggles she admits, but happily the BBC are so obliging to young feminists on the way ‘up’ that it obviously doesn’t matter. It’s all about BBC staff privilige, (you just take turns being famous by refusing anything that Kirsty should have offered, like the Bible or real food). Miranda Hart prefers a complete Wimbledon Tennis Court (with lots of Balls) and no doubt with Strawberry Cream teas delivered by DHL. Entirely practical choice for BBC staff at Salford Quay. I would have preffered the Island of Sheppey on a high tide but then the BBC has to face austerity and budget cuts and comedy talent is sooooo hard to find ouside the BBC leftie sphere. Oh! the seasonal joys of being in the BBC!