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

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
If anyone can get to the un-paywalled version, please share. However, I love the first line of the story - “won’t be making programmes aimed at older viewers because their tastes are too varied”.

So, I guess:
  • Expect more formulaic dross.
  • Expect it to conform to a very tight mindset.
  • Worry, if the BBC is correct, at what mindless sheep the young have become.
Or
  • Marvel at the arrogance of an organisation determined to ignore its remit and serve only a very small group of people.
We won’t make shows for older people, says BBC ... as it pumps £40m into channel aimed at young

Also shared in the BBC Complaints thread.
 
If anyone can get to the un-paywalled version, please share. However, I love the first line of the story - “won’t be making programmes aimed at older viewers because their tastes are too varied”.

So, I guess:
  • Expect more formulaic dross.
  • Expect it to conform to a very tight mindset.
  • Worry, if the BBC is correct, at what mindless sheep the young have become.
Or
  • Marvel at the arrogance of an organisation determined to ignore its remit and serve only a very small group of people.
We won’t make shows for older people, says BBC ... as it pumps £40m into channel aimed at young

Also shared in the BBC Complaints thread.
They won't mind us cancelling our licences then.
Have the grown ups at the BBC ever wondered who pays the bills or how their previous attempts at engaging the youth have fared in viewing figures?
 

TamH70

MIA
If anyone can get to the un-paywalled version, please share. However, I love the first line of the story - “won’t be making programmes aimed at older viewers because their tastes are too varied”.

So, I guess:
  • Expect more formulaic dross.
  • Expect it to conform to a very tight mindset.
  • Worry, if the BBC is correct, at what mindless sheep the young have become.
Or
  • Marvel at the arrogance of an organisation determined to ignore its remit and serve only a very small group of people.
We won’t make shows for older people, says BBC ... as it pumps £40m into channel aimed at young

Also shared in the BBC Complaints thread.
The Daily Express has the same story, and pretty much the same reaction as you, but this is the wrong forum to link it, isn't it?
 

TamH70

MIA
No, given that a certain moderator flounced and never came back, crack on and share the link.

Well, okay then, if I get smited I'll blame you.


"BBC 'leave older viewers behind' with no show – but pump £40million into channel for young

THE BBC has sparked fury after revealing it will not make programmes aimed specifically at an older audience because their tastes are too varied, and is instead pumping an additional £40million into content for younger viewers.​

By PAUL WITHERS"
 

Grownup_Rafbrat

LE
Book Reviewer
If anyone can get to the un-paywalled version, please share. However, I love the first line of the story - “won’t be making programmes aimed at older viewers because their tastes are too varied”.

So, I guess:
  • Expect more formulaic dross.
  • Expect it to conform to a very tight mindset.
  • Worry, if the BBC is correct, at what mindless sheep the young have become.
Or
  • Marvel at the arrogance of an organisation determined to ignore its remit and serve only a very small group of people.
We won’t make shows for older people, says BBC ... as it pumps £40m into channel aimed at young

Also shared in the BBC Complaints thread.
So we stop paying the licence fee at 35 years old?

Where do I get a refund?
 

OneTenner

LE
Book Reviewer
If anyone can get to the un-paywalled version, please share. However, I love the first line of the story - “won’t be making programmes aimed at older viewers because their tastes are too varied”.

So, I guess:
  • Expect more formulaic dross.
  • Expect it to conform to a very tight mindset.
  • Worry, if the BBC is correct, at what mindless sheep the young have become.
Or
  • Marvel at the arrogance of an organisation determined to ignore its remit and serve only a very small group of people.
We won’t make shows for older people, says BBC ... as it pumps £40m into channel aimed at young

Also shared in the BBC Complaints thread.
 

Attachments

  • BBC.pdf
    263.7 KB · Views: 16
BBC2 News, currently: the harpie fronting the programme has just finished interviewing Sir Kent Woods, former head of MHRA over this current clutching of pearls to heaving bosoms - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-56659036

The Metro Wretch was determined to skewer Woods with a Boris/Govt Grrr who are allowing our citizens corpses to fill the streets, having succumbed to blood clots at the heart-rending rate of 30 to 1.8m.

Calmly-and with an ironic smile playing at his lips-Woods raised the observation that risk would always exist plus EMA had still to announce a decision on the matter.

Not content with this, she huffed him off in fairly short order and switched immediately to a OB from Amsterdam fronted by a clone Metro Harpie who breathlessly informed us that not a lot was happening though an announcement from EMA was expected any minute now . . .
 
If anyone can get to the un-paywalled version, please share. However, I love the first line of the story - “won’t be making programmes aimed at older viewers because their tastes are too varied”.

So, I guess:
  • Expect more formulaic dross.
  • Expect it to conform to a very tight mindset.
  • Worry, if the BBC is correct, at what mindless sheep the young have become.
Or
  • Marvel at the arrogance of an organisation determined to ignore its remit and serve only a very small group of people.
We won’t make shows for older people, says BBC ... as it pumps £40m into channel aimed at young

Also shared in the BBC Complaints thread.

They obviously value Diversity, except when it is diversity of views/actions.

Diversity is ... following like sheep the views of the BBC wokerati - and the rest of you can jolly well keep paying for the tosh we want to broadcast to others who may turn up to view on iPlayer
 
BBC2 News, currently: the harpie fronting the programme has just finished interviewing Sir Kent Woods, former head of MHRA over this current clutching of pearls to heaving bosoms - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-56659036

The Metro Wretch was determined to skewer Woods with a Boris/Govt Grrr who are allowing our citizens corpses to fill the streets, having succumbed to blood clots at the heart-rending rate of 30 to 1.8m.

Calmly-and with an ironic smile playing at his lips-Woods raised the observation that risk would always exist plus EMA had still to announce a decision on the matter.

Not content with this, she huffed him off in fairly short order and switched immediately to a OB from Amsterdam fronted by a clone Metro Harpie who breathlessly informed us that not a lot was happening though an announcement from EMA was expected any minute now . . .

I'll bet whoever let this slip through has already picked their P45 and been escorted from the building:

"GP Dr Ellie Cannon tells BBC Breakfast the rate for this type of blood clot has been about one in 2.5 million people.

She says that, in contrast, among 2.5 million 40-year-olds with Covid "we would expect around 2,000 deaths", adding the risk of a clot is "incredibly rare".
"
 
I'll bet whoever let this slip through has already picked their P45 and been escorted from the building:

"GP Dr Ellie Cannon tells BBC Breakfast the rate for this type of blood clot has been about one in 2.5 million people.

She says that, in contrast, among 2.5 million 40-year-olds with Covid "we would expect around 2,000 deaths", adding the risk of a clot is "incredibly rare".
"
Yes, saw that. The BBC doing what it does best, attempting to rubbish the UK & it's achievements.

But anyway, Boris Grrr.
And for those who funded the AZ vaccine, British taxpayers Grrr.
 
They obviously value Diversity, except when it is diversity of views/actions.

Diversity is ... following like sheep the views of the BBC wokerati - and the rest of you can jolly well keep paying for the tosh we want to broadcast to others who may turn up to view on iPlayer
I found this on BiasedBBC which sums up the corporation's arrogance and attitude to the British public:

‘Diversity means having a range of people with various racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and cultural backgrounds and various lifestyles, experience, and interests. … An equal representation of age, race, gender, socio-economic status, religion, and political perspectives in the patient population...

...So we clearly don’t have true diversity in the UK now.'
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I found this on BiasedBBC which sums up the corporation's arrogance and attitude to the British public:

‘Diversity means having a range of people with various racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and cultural backgrounds and various lifestyles, experience, and interests. … An equal representation of age, race, gender, socio-economic status, religion, and political perspectives in the patient population...

...So we clearly don’t have true diversity in the UK now.'
Have them define 'equal'. It's very different from 'proportionate'.
 
I found this on BiasedBBC which sums up the corporation's arrogance and attitude to the British public:

‘Diversity means having a range of people with various racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and cultural backgrounds and various lifestyles, experience, and interests. … An equal representation of age, race, gender, socio-economic status, religion, and political perspectives in the patient population...

...So we clearly don’t have true diversity in the UK now.'
This made me chuckle, 'An equal representation of...race...'. If that were the case there would be far, far fewer black faces on the BBC, and greater numbers of Asians.
 
I made the mistake of watching BBC lunchtime propaganda news today. There was an article about Amnesty International's annual report; fair enough, I'm sure they do a good job. But I have to question why the BBC showed a number of video clips of British police forces services agencies while they were talking about the increased force and policies being used by states during the pandemic. From my viewpoint, and most others I'm absolutely certain, our police have been far less heavy-handed than they really should have been with some of the incidents they've almost dealt with.
 

Bee Companeeee

Old-Salt
I thought she just had a thpeech impediment.
Another mixed race person who identifies as black then. I wonder how their white parent feels when their offspring publicly choose which part of their heritage they prefer and it isnt the part they inherit from them.

As for the reason for changing her name, 30 years ago a spelling mistake was made so the descendant of Shona royalty, educated at public school and Cambridge just rolled with it for 30 years. More like climbing on the bandwagon.
 

bestri10

Old-Salt
Hence my point about proportionate, because equal is, er, unequal.
Equal to them means take away from the majority white population and give to the minority or in other words, as you said, equal is actually unequal. You see it everywhere now on tv, in advertising, the majority of company hiring policy etc. Where they will always pick the black, muslim, female, gay or whatever identity over the white male who is very much more qualified.
Look at TV advertising where you cannot change channels without seeing a lot of black people, even asians over white people, way too many to say they were not picked due to skin colour.
 

Latest Threads

Top