privacy and the bbc

#2
Sir Cliff has won significant damages from the BBC, so expect your licence fees to go up, and a significant change in privacy guidelines is expected.
Would 'congratulations' be appropriate?
Damn right too - the police and the BBC overstepping the mark here, no doubt in a post-Savile frenzy to be 'seen to be doing something'...
Harvey Proctor up next - he's going to take the Met for a huge amount
 
#4
Sir Cliff has won significant damages from the BBC, so expect your licence fees to go up, and a significant change in privacy guidelines is expected.
For the type of case, the damages are significant but in the great scheme of BBC finances, they are bugger all.
It will be interesting to chart the onward progress of the reporter who persuaded the police to let him cover the raid.
 

Echo On

On ROPS
On ROPs
#5
I have no doubt a left-leaning anti-establishment view was taken that cliff is an icon for many, as such is something to be torn down, his sin was to express his religious beliefs and irritate the media. Similarly, with politicians from the conservative party, or anyone else who opposes the socialist media view of the world any behaviour that is less than exemplary will be drawn attention to.

Take for instance "exUKIP Councillor murdered his wife".
If that had been an exLabour councillor or former BBC employee, would there job be linked to the evil action and headlined in a story ?

Its not fake, but clearly carries a bias.
 
#6
I have no doubt a left-leaning anti-establishment view was taken that cliff is an icon for many, as such is something to be torn down, his sin was to express his religious beliefs and irritate the media. Similarly, with politicians from the conservative party, or anyone else who opposes the socialist media view of the world any behaviour that is less than exemplary will be drawn attention to.

Take for instance "exUKIP Councillor murdered his wife".
If that had been an exLabour councillor or former BBC employee, would there job be linked to the evil action and headlined in a story ?

Its not fake, but clearly carries a bias.
Only if he once served as a squaddie. As in "Ex-Tpr Bloggs, who once did 3 days of basic training in..........."
 

Echo On

On ROPS
On ROPs
#7
Only if he once served as a squaddie. As in "Ex-Tpr Bloggs, who once did 3 days of basic training in..........."
Aye you are right. Amusingly the ex councillor concerned, was a former Royal Marine (I did not look at his bio). But I suppose "exRoyal Marine exUKIP exSeason Ticket holder of whatever" is a bit of a mouthful.
 
#8
I find it amusing that the BBC story on the case originally had full details of the estate (including a photo of the gates) that Sir Cliff lives on.
 
#9
The sum awarded and legal costs are a drop in the ocean on the profits the BBC make.
 

diverman

LE
Book Reviewer
#10
For the type of case, the damages are significant but in the great scheme of BBC finances, they are bugger all.
It will be interesting to chart the onward progress of the reporter who persuaded the police to let him cover the raid.
It might be the couple of million they have to pay in legal fees though.
 
#11
The sum awarded and legal costs are a drop in the ocean on the profits the BBC make.
There will be a another award for loss of earnings, to be announced at a later date.
 
#14
Would 'congratulations' be appropriate?
Damn right too - the police and the BBC overstepping the mark here, no doubt in a post-Savile frenzy to be 'seen to be doing something'...
Harvey Proctor up next - he's going to take the Met for a huge amount
We can live in hope!
This is great news, I'm not a fan of the bloke but this was a bloody travesty of trial by media. Good on him.
Fingers crossed we have some improvement in privacy legislation with regard to the media.
 
#16
Maybe the BBC should be on a Pay per view or subscription basis, if that is the case expect a lot of unemployed left wing journos out on the streets crying how unfair life is.
 
#17
Fourteen thousand licence fees going to Cliff. I am not a fan but good luck to him. I think the damages should be paid by the BBC person who authorised the fiasco. And they should also cough up for the hire of the helicopter.
As for the police, haven't they got their hands full chasing hate crime? God this country is a mess.
 
#18
Take for instance "exUKIP Councillor murdered his wife". If that had been an exLabour councillor or former BBC employee, would there job be linked to the evil action and headlined in a story ?

Its not fake, but clearly carries a bias.
It works across the political spectrum and it's sometimes about the most insignificant things.

In a previous life, I was a spokesman for a Labour Group on my local Council. The local paper contacted me for a quote on a story they were running about a Labour Councillor driving around with no tax disk in his car.

I spoke to the individual concerned and it turned out that the car was taxed and the disk had simply fallen from the screen onto the floor of the vehicle.

Yes we all know it should be on display but he had simply forgotten to reaffix it to the screen.

The reporter from the local rag was most put out and very disappointed that she hadn't got a story to run slagging the Councillor off for not taxing his car.

There were other inquiries that often popped up, some of them more serious but I'm pleased to admit, I never had a murder to quote about during my time there.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
#19
For the type of case, the damages are significant but in the great scheme of BBC finances, they are bugger all.
It will be interesting to chart the onward progress of the reporter who persuaded the police to let him cover the raid.
In fairness to the journo, he/she was just doing his job. The errors of judgement were primarily by the police, aided and abetted by a significant contribution from those with editorial responsibility, who should have been more sceptical and measured rather than listening to their inner trot and leaping at the chance for a spectacular victory in their on-going cultural civil war.

As far as the journo was concerned, it was a scoop with the police taking down a high profile celebrity nonce. They can hardly be blamed for yet another conspicuous failure by South Yorkshire Police to find their collective arrse with both hands and nor can they be blamed for their management saying 'Go fetch' whilst taking legal advice from the Emperor Mong.

Apparently the creature that is BBC Director of News is whinging that this judgement creates new case law and represents a dramatic shift against press freedom and the long-standing ability of journalists to report on police investigations. In reality, it's simply yet another shining, and expensive, example of what happens when the state broadcaster is run by morons with an axe to grind whilst the bones of Jimmy Saville rattle gently in the Boardroom cupboard.
 

Echo On

On ROPS
On ROPs
#20
It works across the political spectrum and it's sometimes about the most insignificant things.

In a previous life, I was a spokesman for a Labour Group on my local Council. The local paper contacted me for a quote on a story they were running about a Labour Councillor driving around with no tax disk in his car.

I spoke to the individual concerned and it turned out that the car was taxed and the disk had simply fallen from the screen onto the floor of the vehicle.

Yes we all know it should be on display but he had simply forgotten to reaffix it to the screen.

The reporter from the local rag was most put out and very disappointed that she hadn't got a story to run slagging the Councillor off for not taxing his car.

There were other inquiries that often popped up, some of them more serious but I'm pleased to admit, I never had a murder to quote about during my time there.
Its a good point and happy to concede the correction.
 

Similar threads

Top