They always do. It's the look that says "because of my opinions and connections, I will never struggle to find a job nor be undervalued or underpaid. And I'll make sure I hire plenty of other Guardian-reading types so in the end no one of right wing opinion will work in the media and it'll end up a soft left urban echo chamber."Pretty stupid decision by the BBC. A sort of 'sod you' to the government.
And, that aside, she clearly isn't impartial (or at least hasn't hidden her views) and how can she advocate for and defend impartiality when she is as far from being impartial as possible?
And she looks smug as f*** in her photos too.
‘Faggot’ in Fairytale of New York. (Despite it being an old term for a slovenly individual, not a slur against gays.)
‘One less white n***er’ in Oliver’s Army.* (Despite it not being aimed at black people.)
The wholly ’sexually predator’ nature of Baby it’s cold outside. (Despite the opposite being the case.)
…although note that that comment is from 2017.
*Yes, that is legitimate use of the n-word.
Flick on the echo chamber that passes for debate and what do you see ?They always do. It's the look that says "because of my opinions and connections, I will never struggle to find a job nor be undervalued or underpaid. And I'll make sure I hire plenty of other Guardian-reading types so in the end no one of right wing opinion will work in the media and it'll end up a soft left urban echo chamber."
Obviously someone is checking BBC web pages as that first sentence has now been changed from "nuclear armed" to "nuclear powered"!Aukus: UK, US and Australia pact signals Asia-Pacific power shift
Not so much overt political bias as sheer ignorance. The very first sentence reads :
"A new security partnership in the Asia Pacific will see the UK and US provide Australia with the technology and capability to deploy nuclear-armed submarines."
Which anyone with the slightest attention span would have picked up from any of the other press-releases / media coverage. To be fair they then completely contradict themselves further down the article -
"They will not be nuclear armed, only powered with nuclear reactors."
The editorial team - if there is one - need some lessons in the basics.
What a niggardly postBut will the person who put up a black (shurely 'got it obviously and publicly wrong' ?) find themselves awarded a black mark (shurely something else?). If so, I hope they won't suffer from black dog (shurely 'Ni99er' ? - shurely 'depression' ?)
Well, here's someone who got elbowed by some sultry taff totty in the Night Owl in Penally then.....Well, it's pedantry that keeps me going.
Also - one is a Welsh windbag legend, the other is a Welsh windbag druggie
This is getting like the Middle East where the top job was always to be held by an Arab (Prince?) but the real work was done by their European deputy!Posted elsewhere and not the BBC per se, but a clear combat indicator for the direction of travel broadcast media wise.
On the subject of "diversity".
I sit on the council of a national charity. In order to publicise the work of the charity we have attracted a TV production company who are pitching a series on our work to Ch4. Who are very keen.
So far so good.
The Council met on Tuesday for a regular board meeting and were briefed, by the producer and presenter (a reasonably well known person)
Long story short the production company have now been appraised of the Ch4 diversity requirement. Part of which, and this apparently was in writing, was that no new programme or production would be comissioned or broadcast unless either the main presenter, or co-presenter, was BAME.
Full stop. No ifs or buts. Not implicit, not quietly spoken about , but there, specific and written policy. And by BAME what they really mean is B.