Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The BBC: are claims of political bias justified? Part 2.

AlienFTM

MIA
Book Reviewer
I do believe a lot of Native Americans came out and stated they didn't mind when they were called Red Indians.
It was the white man getting all offended on their behalf that annoyed them.

See also Kemo Shabii getting uptight about a football team.

I remember a news report a good few years ago. They interviewed a Red Indian chief who made it abundantly clear that he identified as a Red Indian.
 
So in retrospect Davros is become the new doctor as it is disabled and is of no discernible gender by having nothing below the waist.

Hope this helps.
 
That is very good.

It's very good on several levels - not least of which is that what the BBC has done to Doctor Who is what it and the Woke movement is attempting to do to the whole of society and its history. It's a really useful metaphor.

Doctor Who has been shredded. Everything in it that worked and was loved has been thrown under the progressive bus. It's been re-cast, irrevocably. And damn what people think. As your previous post noted, never mind if you like it, it's what you're getting.

What can possibly be done to Doctor Who now to bring it back from where it is?

All that it was has been nailed to a small, 'modern', diverse agenda. The huge concepts in the background of it for nigh-on 60 years have been absolutely trivialised. Unless we pretend that it's part of the Great Reset, that we have a Dallas-style 'It was all just a terrible dream' and wake up from the point at which Jodie Whittaker 'regenerated', the franchise is comprehensively fùcked.

(Psst: Even that won't work.)

Don't just blame the writer - though there's culpability enough there. There's once again a whole commissioning, realisation and sign-off process involved before shooting starts which involves many people.

There are numerous stages at which someone - someone plural - could have asked 'Is this good enough?', 'Does it hold to the spirit of what's gone before?', 'Will it please the fan base?', 'Will it please and entertain the wider BBC audience?'

The answer to all of those questions is 'No'.

Oh, the other question - given the need to make money internationally and compete with some rather good Sci-Fi from elsewhere is, 'Does this stack up in terms of intelligence, intricacy and sheer entertainment by comparison with what else is out there?'

... to which the answer is still 'No'.

I mean, FFS, there's plenty of good Sci-Fi/Steampunk and so on out there. The script for this must have been written in Comic Sans. With crayons. After a really good night on the sauce, and against a same-day deadline.

This is/was supposed to be flagship stuff. It's a jewel-in-the-crown, to-be-cherished show.

And this was what the BBC did to it this year.

The same BBC that is saying to people - me included - that 'if' it uses my response to the viewer-satisfaction survey.

Fùck 'em. I mean, seriously fùck 'em. The bunch of talentless, patronising, intellectually bereft losers.
I think that the drinkers assertion that there is an almost palpable sense of spite emanating from the producers around the plummeting ratings, savage critiques and refusal to change tack also encapsulates the current BBC paradigm.
The more woke and liberal they go, the more they alienate the audience demographic they need to retain.

I’d liken it to a traditional pub, complete with horse brasses, oak timbers and real ale. Staid but popular and with a loyal clientele.
Suddenly it’s bought and owned by someone with a “progressive” vision.
Within days the old fixtures have been ripped out and it now has gaudy decor, loud music and its signature drink is Mongolian Koumiss . The manager (She dislikes patriarchal terms like landlord/lady) bars any locals who disagree with the changes and yet wonders why the pub is increasingly empty. The young hip clientele she’s hoping to attract can see through the naffness and don’t really do pubs anyway.
The manager knows they’ve utterly misread the situation, but encouraged by a small cabal of cronies, obdurately refuses to accept the reality and undo the changes or even make some concessions. The pub eventually closes. It’s sold, demolished and the site becomes a housing development. So goeth the BBC?
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I think that the drinkers assertion that there is an almost palpable sense of spite emanating from the producers around the plummeting ratings, savage critiques and refusal to change tack also encapsulates the current BBC paradigm.
The more woke and liberal they go, the more they alienate the audience demographic they need to retain.

I’d liken it to a traditional pub, complete with horse brasses, oak timbers and real ale. Staid but popular and with a loyal clientele.
Suddenly it’s bought and owned by someone with a “progressive” vision.
Within days the old fixtures have been ripped out and it now has gaudy decor, loud music and its signature drink is Mongolian Koumiss . The manager (She dislikes patriarchal terms like landlord/lady) bars any locals who disagree with the changes and yet wonders why the pub is increasingly empty. The young hip clientele she’s hoping to attract can see through the naffness and don’t really do pubs anyway.
The manager knows they’ve utterly misread the situation, but encouraged by a small cabal of cronies, obdurately refuses to accept the reality and undo the changes or even make some concessions. The pub eventually closes. It’s sold, demolished and the site becomes a housing development. So goeth the BBC?
His use of the teddy bear as a corollary is good in that respect.

I'll use another: James Bond. There's the nagging campaign to have a Scottish laird be black.

There are 13 double-oh numbers. That's 12 other potential agents. You can have any number of ethnicities or genders but, no, the target is James Bond. The target is the white male.

You could spin off any number of different Time Lords - The Master is a Time Lord, albeit an errant one. So, again, like James Bond, there's the opportunity to expand the franchise - and in this case, by far more than just a dozen. But, no, the target is The Doctor. The target is the white male.

I haven't stopped watching Doctor Who because I'm prejudiced. I've stopped because the plots are rubbish, the acting ham (is that Whittaker's best, or is she parodying?) and the Woke messages are rammed home At Every Feckin' Opportunity.

I watched the last-but-one Christmas Special. At one point, in frame, was one dominant white female, two blacks, one Asian and hapless white male. There was a 'gay' character who needlessly mentioned he was gay and whose early death was savaged by gay activists because he wasn't on long enough! So, well done BBC, you're managing to píss off the very people you desperately want to be in with.

I'm not racist, homophobic, gender-something-or-other-ist. I'm tired though of being told I am just because I'm a straight white male.

Let's turn this around: what is the BBC producing specifically for straight white males? What is it doing (and spinning it in and every-positive light) to explore my culture and mores?

If it's not producing anything, why not? One, it's discrimination. Two, it's to ignore a huge part of its core audience - core because it's the BBC, where the first 'B' is 'British' and near 90 percent of the population is white. So - what? 45 percent of the total audience?

Actually, it's closer to the 90 percent because a lot of the white female population is fed up as well - as are a good lump of the BAME population because, and here's a thing, they too are fatigued. I know this because - gasp - despite being a straight white male I have non-white friends. Quite a few, actually.

Quite a few are, variously, amused and bemused by being patronised. Oh, and they also have other cultural and media outlets besides the BBC.

That last is a very important point. Setting up something for non-whites is 'enriching'. Setting up something for whites is 'racist'. Usurping the national broadcaster of a country by disenfranchising the majority population is... oh, insert something here about Marxism. Insert something here about destroying a country's culture with the aim of replacing it.

Gammon? You betcha.
 
This is going to seem petty, but over the last 2 weeks there has been the World Indoor Bowls from Norfolk. The BBC are showing 1 match a day in the afternoon, there are 3 matches a day and have been since the start. The BBC are showing countless re-runs of antiques programs and other inane soaps.

They could quite easily shift things around so it could be watched on BBC1 or 2 but no. I wonder if this is because the sport is seen as the reserve of White, Old people and not with the youth and Minorities that the BBC wishes to court, which is quite ironic as a lot of the players have been under 30 and women.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
This is going to seem petty, but over the last 2 weeks there has been the World Indoor Bowls from Norfolk. The BBC are showing 1 match a day in the afternoon, there are 3 matches a day and have been since the start. The BBC are showing countless re-runs of antiques programs and other inane soaps.

They could quite easily shift things around so it could be watched on BBC1 or 2 but no. I wonder if this is because the sport is seen as the reserve of White, Old people and not with the youth and Minorities that the BBC wishes to court, which is quite ironic as a lot of the players have been under 30 and women.
Lazy commissioning - oh, and they'll throw in something about Covid restrictions, too.

But so what if it is the preserve of old, white people? It will remain so unless the doors are opened and people get to see it. Hey - maybe some young blood will get excited and get involved; it's a game of skill, after all.

But - but - what's wrong with giving a few hours over to it? I can choose to watch, or I can bugger off and do something else instead.

(With apologies to Why Don't you?...)
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
I think that if I get yet another request from the BBC to fill in their customer satisfaction survey I will use it to say the BBC are all wrong and not woke or diverse enough.

They need to introduce more strong coloured characters, why is the Queen always shown as a white woman? Why do the BBC always show the same gammon-honkies at Prime Minister's Questions when there are so many BAME people they could use?

Time the BBC git a grip and started to attract the viewers who mean so very little in this country and who consider that the height of intellectual discussion is Gogglebox.
 
That last is a very important point. Setting up something for non-whites is 'enriching'. Setting up something for whites is 'racist'. Usurping the national broadcaster of a country by disenfranchising the majority population is... oh, insert something here about Marxism. Insert something here about destroying a country's culture with the aim of replacing it.

Gammon? You betcha.
Long march through the institutions perhaps?
 
Yes, very much so.

Though whether the foot-soldiers are wittingly doing it is a debate.

If you've done the 'right' media courses, you're doing the 'right thing'.
FWIW, what is said on Arrse about the BBC applies very much to the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). I believe that YouTube still has the ABC coverage of the last election night (2019) when they had a very left-heavy panel who got increasingly despondent as the night wore on and the results came in and "their' side lost.

E2A: yes, it's still there.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
FWIW, what is said on Arrse about the BBC applies very much to the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). I believe that YouTube still has the ABC coverage of the last election night when they had a very left-heavy panel who got increasingly despondent as the night wore on and the results came in and "their' side lost.
Jordan Peterson's encounter was a thing of beauty.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
I've watched a fair few of his vids and the summary could feed into my general views..... The summary would be, the leading characters are always diversity, we are supposed to root for and free of sin and almost perfect(mary sue), or if male, desperately in need of a support act who is stronger and usually female again.

The drinker should review a days telly on the BBC. Because its fictional stuff is as unwatchable as the news and reminds me of an old soviet/german propaganda film.

Diversity is Strength
Unity is Strength
Eh, that is a contradiction !
I am rapidly (have) reached the state that after reading your posts I feel more confused and less knowledgeable! :rolleyes:

I realise you are responding to the clip, but this is not your first post leaving me as Confused-of- Arrse.
 

Latest Threads

Top