|
|
Post by piglet on Jul 20, 2024 10:02:31 GMT
I wont pay sky anymore, and the premiership footballers, so i watch sport, for free on the bbc, no i dont pay the license fee either , its recorded thats ok, because i dont pay a fortune to watch it live.
Like i have the time too.
The golf, football, cricket all have female presenters, the cricket have a female thats black, im sure others are too. Its all done deliberately, i dont get it, what are these people trying to achieve?
All it does to me is bring a feeling of irritation, of being done too, of being controlled, brain washed. For what end? I grew up with David Coleman, and other good presenters who were educated in sport, these women are not. Men are not represented in the female versions of the above.
This childishness is remarkable, that the trans, bearded, purple haired, gay, tattoed, dungareed, etc BBC management think that i me, needs re educating.
I would of course tell them if i could, to shove their re education up their as ses. Which i suspect, is what they like, and in another environment would want me to do that. How did these freaks get to be in charge?
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Jul 21, 2024 6:46:10 GMT
I heard Clive Myrie talking a few days ago about his family's delight when Trevor MacDonald was made a news reader. The Myrie family always watched him - and no other news programs. I just wondered if it occurred to Mr Myrie that this could be regarded as racism.
I have no problem with the BBC using presenters who are from ethnic minorities, but only in proportion to the percentage of that minority in the population - it's far more than that now. I wonder if it occurs to the BBC that many white people are less likely to watch programs that feature large numbers of non-white people. And I wonder if the advertisers are aware that whites are less likely to watch adverts featuring blacks - and vice versa.
It may be regarded as racism by some but it's seems to be a common reaction.
|
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Jul 21, 2024 8:55:19 GMT
Funny you should mention Myrie, he was the presenter of the proms. He was wearing a red handkerchief around his neck, a yellow shirt and looked completely ridiculous, out of place, silly. The conductor was of course Asian and the pianist japanese, all is manufactured, shoving anti white racism at us, while if it was in reverse, all hell would break loose.
The proms are british, european, central european, southern european. I suspect that the above were chosen at the expense of Marino from Manzano Italy, and Rab from Aberdeen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 21, 2024 9:30:49 GMT
Apart from the pianist being black, not Japanese, your remarks are spot on.
It's all part of the Gramscian 'war of position', which is being waged for cultural hegemony, but under the cloak of 'inclusivity'.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jul 21, 2024 15:48:23 GMT
I heard Clive Myrie talking a few days ago about his family's delight when Trevor MacDonald was made a news reader. The Myrie family always watched him - and no other news programs. I just wondered if it occurred to Mr Myrie that this could be regarded as racism. I have no problem with the BBC using presenters who are from ethnic minorities, but only in proportion to the percentage of that minority in the population - it's far more than that now. I wonder if it occurs to the BBC that many white people are less likely to watch programs that feature large numbers of non-white people. And I wonder if the advertisers are aware that whites are less likely to watch adverts featuring blacks - and vice versa. It may be regarded as racism by some but it's seems to be a common reaction. I frequently now do not know what products are being advertised but I recognise the subliminal and direct infusion of targeted diversity into our adverts. Lots of mixed race couples apparent, mostly black male white female, sometimes black male oriental female. If a white father or mother only is present then the child is frequently mixed race. In most advertising niches on tv you can hear the refrain over say ten adverts, black couple, black family, black couple, white mother mixed race child, white mother mixed race child, two children one mixed race, black man, black group, white family! (someone is in for the sack). PS it not only could be considered racism it is undiluted racism as it indicates a racial preference as regards who or what you watch. I can recall many people being castigated for saying they prefer to deal with, or look at people who only look like themselves, But then they were white people. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Jul 21, 2024 16:20:36 GMT
Yes, it's extremely rare these days to see TV ads which do not feature ethnic minorities and mixed race offspring. Just about the only instances I can recall are those for pre-paid funeral plans.
|
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Jul 21, 2024 17:16:48 GMT
I heard Clive Myrie talking a few days ago about his family's delight when Trevor MacDonald was made a news reader. The Myrie family always watched him - and no other news programs. I just wondered if it occurred to Mr Myrie that this could be regarded as racism. I have no problem with the BBC using presenters who are from ethnic minorities, but only in proportion to the percentage of that minority in the population - it's far more than that now. I wonder if it occurs to the BBC that many white people are less likely to watch programs that feature large numbers of non-white people. And I wonder if the advertisers are aware that whites are less likely to watch adverts featuring blacks - and vice versa.It may be regarded as racism by some but it's seems to be a common reaction. Advertisers carefully monitor their advertising spending — and advertising is carefully tailored to its audience and geographic region. White consumers in the UK/Europe obviously don’t react negatively to Black characters and interracial groups portrayed in advertising, or the ads wouldn’t be aired. Conversely, it might be true that Black and interracial audiences actually react favourably to characters depicting them — there’s probably research somewhere supporting this, because I don’t see advertisers (local and multinational) including different races in their advertising just to tick boxes for their diversity returns… |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jul 21, 2024 19:00:32 GMT
I heard Clive Myrie talking a few days ago about his family's delight when Trevor MacDonald was made a news reader. The Myrie family always watched him - and no other news programs. I just wondered if it occurred to Mr Myrie that this could be regarded as racism. I have no problem with the BBC using presenters who are from ethnic minorities, but only in proportion to the percentage of that minority in the population - it's far more than that now. I wonder if it occurs to the BBC that many white people are less likely to watch programs that feature large numbers of non-white people. And I wonder if the advertisers are aware that whites are less likely to watch adverts featuring blacks - and vice versa.It may be regarded as racism by some but it's seems to be a common reaction. Advertisers carefully monitor their advertising spending — and advertising is carefully tailored to its audience and geographic region. White consumers in the UK/Europe obviously don’t react negatively to Black characters and interracial groups portrayed in advertising, or the ads wouldn’t be aired. Conversely, it might be true that Black and interracial audiences actually react favourably to characters depicting them — there’s probably research somewhere supporting this, because I don’t see advertisers (local and multinational) including different races in their advertising just to tick boxes for their diversity returns… How can this be, the UK is supposedly overtly racist and institutionally discriminatory yet now you say white audiences are not negatively reactive to an abundance of black personnel in adverts and programmes but black audiences may react negatively to white faces as Mr Myrie specifically stated was the case. Currently at a guess I would say white people reacting negatively are regarded as low in numbers and of no consequence in any case. We can see from the disasters with Budweiser light that selection of actors in adverts is quite critical and perhaps there is no tipping point as regards sales that is as yet observable. I think tick boxing is the most likely answer to why actors are so obviously racially selected and increasing sales to the ethnic minority community is quite important. That is probably true as to why ethnic minority men are more often the participants in a mixed race marriage as there may be negative connotations within those communities if it is white men and black women. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Jul 21, 2024 20:01:18 GMT
Advertisers carefully monitor their advertising spending — and advertising is carefully tailored to its audience and geographic region. White consumers in the UK/Europe obviously don’t react negatively to Black characters and interracial groups portrayed in advertising, or the ads wouldn’t be aired. Conversely, it might be true that Black and interracial audiences actually react favourably to characters depicting them — there’s probably research somewhere supporting this, because I don’t see advertisers (local and multinational) including different races in their advertising just to tick boxes for their diversity returns… How can this be, the UK is supposedly overtly racist and institutionally discriminatory yet now you say white audiences are not negatively reactive to an abundance of black personnel in adverts and programmes but black audiences may react negatively to white faces as Mr Myrie specifically stated was the case. Currently at a guess I would say white people reacting negatively are regarded as low in numbers and of no consequence in any case. We can see from the disasters with Budweiser light that selection of actors in adverts is quite critical and perhaps there is no tipping point as regards sales that is as yet observable. I think tick boxing is the most likely answer to why actors are so obviously racially selected and increasing sales to the ethnic minority community is quite important. That is probably true as to why ethnic minority men are more often the participants in a mixed race marriage as there may be negative connotations within those communities if it is white men and black women. Weren’t those Bud ads pulled? The ads being complained about on TV in the UK are still running. No doubt that offends a few people here but, ultimately, money mostly drives what’s aired. Box ticking doesn’t add to the bottom line so, if there’s no outcry of consequence, and the response surveys show positivity, why bother? I’ve not totted up the comparative numbers of males to females in the couples’ ethnicity stakes, so you’ll have to do that for me — maybe I’m becoming more White and it doesn’t register with me… |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jul 22, 2024 7:32:28 GMT
How can this be, the UK is supposedly overtly racist and institutionally discriminatory yet now you say white audiences are not negatively reactive to an abundance of black personnel in adverts and programmes but black audiences may react negatively to white faces as Mr Myrie specifically stated was the case. Currently at a guess I would say white people reacting negatively are regarded as low in numbers and of no consequence in any case. We can see from the disasters with Budweiser light that selection of actors in adverts is quite critical and perhaps there is no tipping point as regards sales that is as yet observable. I think tick boxing is the most likely answer to why actors are so obviously racially selected and increasing sales to the ethnic minority community is quite important. That is probably true as to why ethnic minority men are more often the participants in a mixed race marriage as there may be negative connotations within those communities if it is white men and black women. Weren’t those Bud ads pulled? The ads being complained about on TV in the UK are still running. No doubt that offends a few people here but, ultimately, money mostly drives what’s aired. Box ticking doesn’t add to the bottom line so, if there’s no outcry of consequence, and the response surveys show positivity, why bother? I’ve not totted up the comparative numbers of males to females in the couples’ ethnicity stakes, so you’ll have to do that for me — maybe I’m becoming more White and it doesn’t register with me… The ads were pulled because sales plummeted, the fact that white audiences as regards the gross racial imbalance in advertising have not reacted badly does not excuse the overt racial selection present in the advertising industry. If the argument is that they are pandering to an audience that prefer to see their own kind in adverts that outlook has been condemned as unacceptable for over 60 years. Totting up is an easy count, if does not register you are obviously at odds with most of your fellows as totting up has been a pretty high profile pastime for many black people when observing entertainment as Mr Myrie's comments make only too clear. |
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Jul 22, 2024 8:06:24 GMT
I wont pay sky anymore, and the premiership footballers, so i watch sport, for free on the bbc, no i dont pay the license fee either , its recorded thats ok, because i dont pay a fortune to watch it live. Like i have the time too. The golf, football, cricket all have female presenters, the cricket have a female thats black, im sure others are too. Its all done deliberately, i dont get it, what are these people trying to achieve? All it does to me is bring a feeling of irritation, of being done too, of being controlled, brain washed. For what end? I grew up with David Coleman, and other good presenters who were educated in sport, these women are not. Men are not represented in the female versions of the above. This childishness is remarkable, that the trans, bearded, purple haired, gay, tattoed, dungareed, etc BBC management think that i me, needs re educating. I would of course tell them if i could, to shove their re education up their as ses. Which i suspect, is what they like, and in another environment would want me to do that. How did these freaks get to be in charge? You're not wrong Piglet . I can't do without my fix of live sport so unfortunately I have to hold my nose so to speak and hand over my £20 a month to Sky sports . What I don't do anymore though is listen to all crappo before or after the game from someone with about as much expert or inside knowledge as my Mrs . It is getting expensive though and I may pull the plug on the whole package at the next inevitable price rise . It will be cheaper to watch the sport Im interested in down the pub As for the ethnic and minority stuff its very noticeable that every walk of life has to be represented in every programme .Its made some programmes unwatchable and others offensive . the BBC without advertising revenue to worry about are the worst offenders |
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Jul 22, 2024 9:13:18 GMT
We are in Britain, adverts should reflect rule brittania, english culture, yorkshire pud, rock music, the royals, beer, etc, not as in Myries case, in my mind, a cabin boy on a slave ship being passed around. He looks like the BBC deliberately made him look stupid, like a cabin boy. Shouldnt we have a white presenter in a tux, well spoken, educated in music, a musician, like wots is name who did culture programmes who now wont work for the bbc. To oppose though and be critical will attract nastiness, even though all have a right to speak.
Britain is not multi cultural.
Its British.
|
|
|
|
The BBC.
Jul 23, 2024 2:34:55 GMT
via mobile
Post by johnofgwent on Jul 23, 2024 2:34:55 GMT
Yes, it's extremely rare these days to see TV ads which do not feature ethnic minorities and mixed race offspring. Just about the only instances I can recall are those for pre-paid funeral plans. I noted Matalan have changed their adverts to reflect the reality on our sink estates round here. You still get a mix of ethnicities in the kids, but these days the 'mothers' are generally a racial match and in a nod and wink to reality the fathers are nowhere to be seen. I was astounded about six months ago to find a white couple in a house in an advert. It was for Zoopla or purple bricks and they were depicted as the neighbourhood troublemakers. If ethnics and multiracials are as rare as the census claims, surely the answer is to stop spending money with companies who use this model of advertising. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jul 23, 2024 4:04:41 GMT
I wont pay sky anymore, and the premiership footballers, so i watch sport, for free on the bbc, no i dont pay the license fee either , its recorded thats ok, because i dont pay a fortune to watch it live. Like i have the time too. The golf, football, cricket all have female presenters, the cricket have a female thats black, im sure others are too. Its all done deliberately, i dont get it, what are these people trying to achieve? All it does to me is bring a feeling of irritation, of being done too, of being controlled, brain washed. For what end? I grew up with David Coleman, and other good presenters who were educated in sport, these women are not. Men are not represented in the female versions of the above. This childishness is remarkable, that the trans, bearded, purple haired, gay, tattoed, dungareed, etc BBC management think that i me, needs re educating. I would of course tell them if i could, to shove their re education up their as ses. Which i suspect, is what they like, and in another environment would want me to do that. How did these freaks get to be in charge? Remember all the sagas regarding Yourkshire cricket captains. They were too white and were harangued by the muslim brotherhood and thrown out. I guess the same happened down at the BBC. |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Jul 27, 2024 2:05:33 GMT
We are in Britain, adverts should reflect rule brittania, english culture, yorkshire pud, rock music, the royals, beer, etc, not as in Myries case, in my mind, a cabin boy on a slave ship being passed around. He looks like the BBC deliberately made him look stupid, like a cabin boy. Shouldnt we have a white presenter in a tux, well spoken, educated in music, a musician, like wots is name who did culture programmes who now wont work for the bbc. To oppose though and be critical will attract nastiness, even though all have a right to speak. Britain is not multi cultural. Its British. Crickey where do you live if you think it is not multi-cultural? I used to love my job, you met a load of people and you could have a good laugh. Now everybody I meet speaks little or no English, and I find myself feeling lonely even when I'm inside a gigantic distribution centre filled with 500 workers! |
|
