A glance in the mirror is not something I look forward too since I have little pleasure in studying my weather beaten features of fifty plus years and I doubt anyone would be that taken with them either, still enough of you read this stuff so it can't be that important.
Anyway the BBC has behaved in a rather disgraceful way to former Country File presenter Miriam O'Reilly and clearly discriminated against her on grounds of ageism.
Of course I'm sure this sort of thing has never occurred in the past and this earlier posting of mine from June 17, 2009 is in no way evidence of a policy of side-lining mature presenters.
Still I had an interesting insight into what goes on in the mind of BBC managers and presume the organisation, when one of them told me that by plonking a weather girl sorry presenter, on the late news edition of South East Today, viewing figures increased by ten per cent.
How shallow, the BBC gets its licence fee, in part by being unique, so we are told, so how about respecting presenters and journalists on the basis of experience knowledge depth rather than whether Muppets like you and I find a presenter attractive or not.
Still the BBC looks to me to be another part of the bloated selfish public sector, run by smug politically correct elite that has perverted the idea of public services delivered in a fair and equitable manner.
Perhaps the most irritating aspect of BBC news coverage was the "interview " with Alan Yentob, Creative Director, I feel the reporter could have been a bit more adventurous, perhaps by asking a hypothetical question like this, "Mr Yentob, your no spring chicken yourself, your balding, old, so how would you feel, if you found your career destroyed simply because you were knocking on a bit and then after months of legal argument, some grisly, very well paid, senior executive, gave a miserly contrived apology?
The BBC is just a pile of lying masonic zio-nazi dog poo.
ReplyDeleteCheck out some real television for a change:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO45VBO6Swo
What a charming turn of phrase, 9:02, though I think it hardly likely that a collection of lefty, Labour luvvies are in anyway connected with the masons or Nazis. You do have something of a tendency to confuse your left from your right but, don't tell me, they are all the same and you are the only one in the middle who can see the light. Are you sure you are not the second coming?
ReplyDeleteIts just not the BBC that has this policy of putting eye candy on screen rather thsn the older generation of both sexes.
ReplyDeleteIts just that most of the channels use contract staff rather than employees that can sue. There are many exaples. C4 recruited a young girl when then needed a new person that was good at sums on Countdown. SKY news uses mainly young girls to read the news and weather including new recruit Nazaneen Ghaffar from BBC Kent.
10:25 Your comment firmly establishes then that it is certainly about youth and not stunning good looks, leastways with Sky!
ReplyDeleteThe BBC is in no way different from virtually every other broadcaster in the way it uses "glossy" presenters. The question is whether we should expect them to be, as a publicly funded organisation.
ReplyDeleteWhat I find hard to reconcile is the criticism in the post that they have been ageist and prejudiced with the adjacent criticism that they are politically correct!!! It seems that the poster's purpose is just to rant against the BBC.
As for the continued suggestion of left-wing bias in the organisation, sorry, but I simply do not see it.
zio-nazis are commies, the pigs in Orwell's Animal Farm, they murdered the Tsar and ran the Soviet Union, stole the russian oil under Yeltsin, infiltrated and took over the CIA pre 9/11 and are now pushing the global warming nonsense... charming people by all accounts.
ReplyDeleteProbably because you stand on the left. You should try looking (and listening) from our side.
ReplyDeleteThen presumably, 4:36, masons must be commies as well. You still have not confirmed whether or not you are the second coming.
ReplyDeletePerhaps (second) Anon 4.36 it is because "[y]our side" wants it all presented in a particular way. Both right and left have complained of bias at the BBC over time, so perhaps the organisation is getting it right.
ReplyDeleteI suppose publishing rants about the BBC is a suitable distraction from other matters of national concern
Tony it would seem your site has been over run by complete idiots, no doubt many masons are meddling in our life but I'm sure its more about money than media
ReplyDelete8:50 Not about money, the money is just a means to an end, to grease the wheels. The end is to gain absolute power, which incidentally is not going to happen, they have over-reached. They use the media to herd the sheep.
ReplyDelete10:15PM See you have managed to bring sheep and shepherding into the equation. Will it be stars in the east next one wonders. And just who have over reached themselves, surely not a bunch of kings and wisemen. At least it is all topical.
ReplyDeleteInteresting suggestion that idiots are infesting the blog. It is actually getting difficult to tell the difference between the conspiracy theory nutters and those other ones who have already forgotten what a disaster the Labour government was. Makes one wonder whether the great public are actually deserving of, or even ready for, democracy.
Or even those with more years under their belt and better memories to recall how disastrous the last Tory Government was. What goes around comes around.
ReplyDeleteOr maybe those even older who recall the disaster that was Jim Callaghan's government, the rubbish in the streets, the unburied dead, the winter of discontent, Dennis Healy going cap in hand to the IMF, the devaluation of our money.
ReplyDeleteOr perhaps you would prefer Harold Wilson's classic 'pound in your pocket' nonsense or Stafford Cripps and his 'Ground Nut' scheme.
No matter how hard you try, there is always a Labour disaster worse than anything the Tories could come up with.
Suez springs to mind, Anon, to challenge and maybe disprove your theory! Gosh this could become an interesting history lesson. I suspect it is driven more by your - and my - political leanings than completely objective factual analysis, though.
ReplyDeleteSuez challenges nothing. An international shipping route, owned by an Anglo French company, was illegally seized by Nasser and, Eden, the then PM of the UK, diplomacy having achieved nothing, decided with our French allies to invade.
ReplyDeleteThe USA, jealous of British influence and trade in the middle east, turned against us whilst Labour broke the with the tradition of supporting the government in time of war. Only France and Australia supported us in the UN.
Militarily the invasion was a total success with all objectives taken in days at a cost of very minimal casulties. Politically, with so called friends home and abroad stabbing the government in the back, it was a disaster. Subequently much informed military and political opinion in America has concluded that the Middle East would have been a far less troubled area since had the British action in 1956 been supported.
By the way, I was there with 22 Ports Task Provost Company and, yes, we probably are on opposite sides of the political divide though I suspect we both want what is best for our country.
It is always something to have been involved in an affair - of whatever kind - that subsequently acquires a place in history. I was just being born as the Suez Crisis was under way. The Crisis caught the news!
ReplyDelete11:26, personal insults will get you nowhere, although I suspect you're on some sort of payroll to deflect any comments that come too close to the truth... so at least you can earn a few bob for typing out your inane drivel.. but it's all in vain old fruit, the natives are getting restless, they know something's up.
ReplyDelete11;39PM Perhaps folk like me would take you more seriously if you ever answered a question. Who are these restless natives, where is your evidence for a mass awakening and to what precisely? In the absence of any answers you remain guilty of peddling rubbish and will be dismissed accordingly. Live with it!
ReplyDelete