Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2023 0:25:14 GMT
The future of one of the greatest British institutions should not be decided by any one person
The BBC ( Our BBC ) is a very highly respected organisation internationally, and has just celebrated 100 years of service to the British people, and to those in the world who look for reliable, honest and accurate news.
Why do the Conservatives always want to destroy anything we have which we, the people own and love ?
Anyone of a certain age must appreciate what the BBC means, its part of our culture, I grew up with Blue Peter, Animal Magic and Dads Army, true British classics which are legendary. Since de-regulation of TV, all we get are imports, American garbbage, repeats, colossal amounts of advertising and cheap to make fly on the wall rubbish.
Time to regulate TV again, limit the stations to 10, in order to increase advertising revenue, thereby increase quality of programming. Add the TV licence to income tax and save the BBC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2023 9:57:50 GMT
The future of one of the greatest British institutions should not be decided by any one person The BBC ( Our BBC ) is a very highly respected organisation internationally, and has just celebrated 100 years of service to the British people, and to those in the world who look for reliable, honest and accurate news. Why do the Conservatives always want to destroy anything we have which we, the people own and love ? Anyone of a certain age must appreciate what the BBC means, its part of our culture, I grew up with Blue Peter, Animal Magic and Dads Army, true British classics which are legendary. Since de-regulation of TV, all we get are imports, American garbbage, repeats, colossal amounts of advertising and cheap to make fly on the wall rubbish. Time to regulate TV again, limit the stations to 10, in order to increase advertising revenue, thereby increase quality of programming. Add the TV licence to income tax and save the BBC. The BBC is nowhere near as respected as it used to be due to an obvious failure on the impartiality front in recent years. We on the left became all too aware of the blatant anti-left bias during the Corbyn era. Domestically, broad swathes of the British public - from left wingers to Scottish nationalists, and from Brexiteers to culture warriors - have lost trust in the reliability, honesty, accuracy and impartiality of BBC news and current affairs output. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 2, 2023 12:02:54 GMT
You failed to defend her because I asked what evidence there was to suggest she is any smarter than a typical secretary, which by most accounts is a very simple career. This all turned on its head once she joined the military. It does not figure.
We have 22,855 professors in the UK and one BBC. Why use an ex-secretary?
The secretary might actually be quite intelligent. Not everyone who does lower level jobs is a thicko you know. You are frankly coming across as a bit of a snob. As long as she has the intelligence to do the job - and having been a secretary does not prove that she does not, your own snobbish assumptions notwithstanding - then it might even be a positive to have a normal person from an everyday job in the role, rather than yet another elitist. So you have no way of showing she has any higher intelligence than the average secretary and instead find it easier to attack me by name calling. Actually I didn't think anyone would on here. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2023 15:24:42 GMT
srb7677 Wrote "The BBC is nowhere near as respected as it used to be due to an obvious failure on the impartiality front in recent years. We on the left became all too aware of the blatant anti-left bias during the Corbyn era.
Domestically, broad swathes of the British public - from left wingers to Scottish nationalists, and from Brexiteers to culture warriors - have lost trust in the reliability, honesty, accuracy and impartiality of BBC news and current affairs output."
Its a daily occurance where those on the Left of politics, and those on the Right accuse the BBC of not been impartial, and personaly I just dont believe it.
What I do believe is that there are certain personalities or presenters who we suspect of having a particular slant to reporting or presenting, but as an institution I am convinced that there is no persistent bias either way.
In TV output, the only thing that produces "quality" is money, you simply cannot make quality drama, sitcoms, documentaries, childrens programmes or good news and current affairs programmes without resources. If we end up taking money away from the BBC, the result will be poorer quality.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 2, 2023 15:39:28 GMT
srb7677 Wrote "The BBC is nowhere near as respected as it used to be due to an obvious failure on the impartiality front in recent years. We on the left became all too aware of the blatant anti-left bias during the Corbyn era. Domestically, broad swathes of the British public - from left wingers to Scottish nationalists, and from Brexiteers to culture warriors - have lost trust in the reliability, honesty, accuracy and impartiality of BBC news and current affairs output." Its a daily occurance where those on the Left of politics, and those on the Right accuse the BBC of not been impartial, and personaly I just dont believe it. What I do believe is that there are certain personalities or presenters who we suspect of having a particular slant to reporting or presenting, but as an institution I am convinced that there is no persistent bias either way.In TV output, the only thing that produces "quality" is money, you simply cannot make quality drama, sitcoms, documentaries, childrens programmes or good news and current affairs programmes without resources. If we end up taking money away from the BBC, the result will be poorer quality. Here is an exercise for you to do.
The BBC has in its Royal Charter a bit that says part of its role is to educate. Lets look at the BBC's radio broadcast output. I don't have a TV licence so no comment from me on the rest. Out of all the radio stations the only one set up to do this is Radio 4 because the others are music. I tend to keep track of what is on radio 4, although I rarely listen to it now. Anyway, going back to education, we have arts and sciences. Lets skip the arts and zoom in on the BBC's science output on Radio 4. As you know, there are many fields of science. Perhaps to see if it is balanced, add up all the times each field of science is covered on Radio Four and what I think you will find, as a guestimate, is about 80% of the time is allocated to medical science as per any science that pertains to the health of a human or perhaps an animal. My hypothesis on why this is so is because this particular subject appeals to women. I mean there is a deep instinctive part of the woman's mind that is orientated towards this activity, especially in their role of bringing up the young. You can test it if y0u like.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2023 20:30:51 GMT
The secretary might actually be quite intelligent. Not everyone who does lower level jobs is a thicko you know. You are frankly coming across as a bit of a snob. As long as she has the intelligence to do the job - and having been a secretary does not prove that she does not, your own snobbish assumptions notwithstanding - then it might even be a positive to have a normal person from an everyday job in the role, rather than yet another elitist. So you have no way of showing she has any higher intelligence than the average secretary... And you have no way of showing she hasn't, just your snobbish assumption that anyone who works as a secretary must be thick. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 2, 2023 20:48:50 GMT
So you have no way of showing she has any higher intelligence than the average secretary... And you have no way of showing she hasn't, just your snobbish assumption that anyone who works as a secretary must be thick. I have already shown it by showing she got 5 o levels and trained in a secretary college. If she had a brain she would have done A levels and then a degree. So as it stands, by the balance of probabilities, she is a dunce. Do you have anything to argue in the opposite direction? I mean even a video of her explaining something complicated would be evidence. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jan 13, 2023 18:52:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 13, 2023 18:56:04 GMT
Horrible leftie woman, she hated Johnson along with that other dragon Emily Maitlis, and that Question Time Fiona Bruce, these three leftie lovies always give the Conservatives a rough interview, while bum licking the Labour MPs, it stands out a mile. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2023 23:36:51 GMT
Horrible leftie woman, she hated Johnson along with that other dragon Emily Maitlis, and that Question Time Fiona Bruce, these three leftie lovies always give the Conservatives a rough interview, while bum licking the Labour MPs, it stands out a mile. Rubbish where Bruce is concerned. She has always shown blatant Tory and anti-left bias. This might now be much less obvious now the Labour party is no longer a party of the left. |
|
|
|
Post by nonnie2 on Jan 13, 2023 23:53:59 GMT
The future of one of the greatest British institutions should not be decided by any one person The BBC ( Our BBC ) is a very highly respected organisation internationally, and has just celebrated 100 years of service to the British people, and to those in the world who look for reliable, honest and accurate news. Why do the Conservatives always want to destroy anything we have which we, the people own and love ? Anyone of a certain age must appreciate what the BBC means, its part of our culture, I grew up with Blue Peter, Animal Magic and Dads Army, true British classics which are legendary. Since de-regulation of TV, all we get are imports, American garbbage, repeats, colossal amounts of advertising and cheap to make fly on the wall rubbish. Time to regulate TV again, limit the stations to 10, in order to increase advertising revenue, thereby increase quality of programming. Add the TV licence to income tax and save the BBC. The conservatives don't want to destroy the BBC. Just like an awful lot of the public, the conservatives feel the current way the BBC is funded is now archaic and a more fairer better way is possibly required. One idea was to have the BBC as Pay As You View. I would favour that because I don't watch any BBC programmes. One other option was to put it on your council tax bill. So to say the Conservatives want to destroy the BBC is nothing more than disinformation. |
|
|
|
Post by borchester on Jan 14, 2023 0:14:57 GMT
Don't we have anyone more intelligent than a secretary to do these important jobs?. Why do you believe you need more than five O Levels and a peerage to hold that position ?
Baron started out life in the Gut in Valetta and as such tends to view the term secretarial services in a rather risque manner.
Right now the Conservatives ambition is to cancel the BBC's licence fee and to give Auntie a few good kicks in the wedding tackle in the process. As Tina is a staunch Tory it is unlikely that she is the best girl for the job. But since no one really likes the Beeb these days, she is probably the best of a bad job
|
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jan 14, 2023 0:20:19 GMT
The future of one of the greatest British institutions should not be decided by any one person The BBC ( Our BBC ) is a very highly respected organisation internationally, and has just celebrated 100 years of service to the British people, and to those in the world who look for reliable, honest and accurate news. Why do the Conservatives always want to destroy anything we have which we, the people own and love ? Anyone of a certain age must appreciate what the BBC means, its part of our culture, I grew up with Blue Peter, Animal Magic and Dads Army, true British classics which are legendary. Since de-regulation of TV, all we get are imports, American garbbage, repeats, colossal amounts of advertising and cheap to make fly on the wall rubbish. Time to regulate TV again, limit the stations to 10, in order to increase advertising revenue, thereby increase quality of programming. Add the TV licence to income tax and save the BBC. The conservatives don't want to destroy the BBC. Just like an awful lot of the public, the conservatives feel the current way the BBC is funded is now archaic and a more fairer better way is possibly required. One idea was to have the BBC as Pay As You View. I would favour that because I don't watch any BBC programmes. One other option was to put it on your council tax bill. So to say the Conservatives want to destroy the BBC is nothing more than disinformation. Trouble is, just turning it into another commercial channel will destroy the BBC. You don't get programs like Planet Earth on commercial TV. You get shite like reality TV. Cheap to put on lowest common denominator ratings chasers. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jan 14, 2023 1:22:11 GMT
Why do you believe you need more than five O Levels and a peerage to hold that position ?
Baron started out life in the Gut in Valetta and as such tends to view the term secretarial services in a rather risque manner.
Right now the Conservatives ambition is to cancel the BBC's licence fee and to give Auntie a few good kicks in the wedding tackle in the process. As Tina is a staunch Tory it is unlikely that she is the best girl for the job. But since no one really likes the Beeb these days, she is probably the best of a bad job
I think this thread got waylaid somewhat.
I started to present my evidence, but the jury got a bit excited.
Now for the woman herself, explaining what she plans to do with the BBC in a typical secretarial way. The bottom line is that she agrees unless it is sufficiently dumbed down she will cut off their public funding. Maybe there will become a time when even she understands it, but for now, can you extract any intelligence from her comments? It's like her brain is made of some jelly substance. Psychiatrists call it a word salad, like the ramblings of a mad woman. She's perfected the art of presentation, probably had pro PR lessons in it, but there is nothing up there to present.
|
|
|
|
Post by nonnie2 on Jan 14, 2023 1:25:46 GMT
The conservatives don't want to destroy the BBC. Just like an awful lot of the public, the conservatives feel the current way the BBC is funded is now archaic and a more fairer better way is possibly required. One idea was to have the BBC as Pay As You View. I would favour that because I don't watch any BBC programmes. One other option was to put it on your council tax bill. So to say the Conservatives want to destroy the BBC is nothing more than disinformation. Trouble is, just turning it into another commercial channel will destroy the BBC. You don't get programs like Planet Earth on commercial TV. You get shite like reality TV. Cheap to put on lowest common denominator ratings chasers. Reality TV on the BBC www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/formats/reality/allI watch Tipping Point, and then The Chase. That's about it. If I watch anything else, it's normally channel 12. So I don't do reality TV because I agree, it's crap, and I don't watch Planet Earth. The thing is, the BBC worked and was ok when we had 3 channels, or maybe 4. But now we have hundreds and I believe Licence numbers are now falling because the younger generation don't watch TV, they're into such streaming services as Netflicks. I don't watch TV because I view YouTube instead, I prefer to watch and learn programmes on demand. My TV days have long gone. If the BBC is value for money, and/or it appeals to the masses, then it would survive on subscription. So why are the viewing numbers falling? |
|
