Let’s talk about BBC

[C R]

And today in parliament, the voice of reason prevails

9m ago14.09 GMT
Sammy Wilson (DUP) says people should no longer have to pay the licence fee. It is a “poll tax on propaganda”, he says.

Lopez says the government is concerned the licence fee is losing public support. It is considering how the BBC should be funded in the long term.

And so it continues the dismantling of the BBC.

 

[icowden]

And today in parliament, the voice of reason prevails

That was sarcasm right?

 

[Salty seadog]

You've nailed it.
How can the BBC remain impartial when it's remit is to Inform, Educate and Entertain?
For balance must it not give equal time to misinforming, rendering ignorant and boring its audience, in the manner, say, of a Nadine Dorries novel?

dutchguy for Director General. You heard it here first.

You're better than that.

 

[fozy tornip]

Not always, plainly.

 

[BoldonLad]

You've nailed it.
How can the BBC remain impartial when it's remit is to Inform, Educate and Entertain?
For balance must it not give equal time to misinforming, rendering ignorant and boring its audience, in the manner, say, of a Nadine Dorries novel?

dutchguy for Director General. You heard it here first.

On that basis, isn’t the BBC fulfilling it’s remit admirably? 🙂

 

[Beebo]

As shrewdly pointed out elsewhere. If the BBC was truest impartial Nicholas Witchell should spend 50% of his time advocating for a republic.

 

[Milzy]

If life was a forum, Gary would have been gagged and cancelled. I think both sides have been able to talk and the situation has been resolved better than most people would have thought.

 

[Rusty Nails]

It's confirmed the prejudices of both the right and the left. Win-win.

 

[cookiemonster]

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9tzoGFszog

 

[icowden]

There's pressure on Bruce as well. She's ''stepped back'' from her ambassador role with Refuge and there now are calls for her to get axed from Question Time.

An interesting bit in Private Eye this week. Apparently rather than providing context as per BBC guidelines, the BBC did not provide the correct context. Apparently this:-

Just so everyone knows what this is referring to, Stanley Johnson's [ex] wife spoke to a journalist, Tom Bower, and she said that Stanley Johnson had broken her nose and that she'd ended up in hospital as a result. "Stanley Johnson has not commented publicly on that. Friends of his have said it did happen, it was a one-off.

Is a confected lie "compromise" agreed between the Mail's legal department and Johnson's lawyers, Carter-Fvck. What Stanley's wife, Charlotte Wahl actually said was:

He was always hitting me and Boris saw it... He hit me and hit me... He was always shouting, angry and then he hit me... He hit me many times, over many years.

In addition to the broken nose she also suffered a nervous breakdown which required several months of treatment in a psychiatric ward.

Lovely bloke.

 

[matticus]

An interesting bit in Private Eye this week. Apparently rather than providing context as per BBC guidelines, the BBC did not provide the correct context. Apparently this:-

...

Surely your first quoted text is true.(it's just reporting what has been said and by whom).
The 2nd (words from Charlotte) are just allegations.

I would say that reporting the following is damning enough. No-one will have heard this and thought he sounds like a nice guy:
"she said that Stanley Johnson had broken her nose and that she'd ended up in hospital as a result."

 

[icowden]

Surely your first quoted text is true.(it's just reporting what has been said and by whom).
The 2nd (words from Charlotte) are just allegations.

But they are published and unrefuted allegations from Charlotte Wahl's interview with Tom Bower (Journalist). What the BBC reported was the "one off" claim agreed with the Mail by Carter-Fvck and not the substantive claim of abuse over many years. Carter-Fvuck's account is of a single incident of "mutual flailing" initiated by Charlotte Wahl, and this is what was referenced by the BBC.

 

[matticus]

But they are published and unrefuted allegations from Charlotte Wahl's interview with Tom Bower (Journalist). What the BBC reported was the "one off" claim agreed with the Mail by Carter-Fvck and not the substantive claim of abuse over many years. Carter-Fvuck's account is of a single incident of "mutual flailing" initiated by Charlotte Wahl, and this is what was referenced by the BBC.

Only the broken nose has independent corroboration. That is what is reported here. And it's a pretty damning incident, so why try to drag in further noise? And if you do, why not report further on the marriage? Where would you stop?

Anyway, I knew how much NACA sympathy this viewpoint would get even before I turned on the internet. Stale pale tory wife-abuser?? Def-con 1 status

 

[icowden]

Only the broken nose has independent corroboration. That is what is reported here. And it's a pretty damning incident, so why try to drag in further noise? And if you do, why not report further on the marriage? Where would you stop?

I think it would have been fairer of the BBC to point out that Johnson is accused of serially beating his wife ending in a hospitalisation for a broken nose not a glib comment about a one off incident prepared by Johnson's lawyers. I think that is the angle of the Private Eye article.

 

[icowden]

Only the broken nose has independent corroboration. That is what is reported here.

And yet Johnson hasn't sued for libel or slander over the other allegations. He isn't short of cash, so what does that tell you?