Folk awards FoI request denied

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 11 - 06:45 AM

If the judges were named - they would be open to all sorts of pressure for them to change their votes.

Just drop the subject and stop moaning

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Geoff the Duck
Date: 13 Dec 11 - 06:40 AM

I sometimes wonder about Mudcat...

Every day Emma Hartley starts a new thread which consists of "Tabloid Headline - come and click on the Blicky to my blog...". We then hear no more from her on the thread.
In the meanwhile, a bunch of mudcat regulars (are caught in the net and hauled up on deck flapping about like wet fish) spend hours arguing about whatever irrelevance was on the blog.

Personally I think the original daily posts should just be deleted as spam.

Quack!
GtD.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: treewind
Date: 13 Dec 11 - 04:30 AM

"folk music shouldn't be about judgement and trophies and music industry garlands, it was about real people making real music in an honest, heartfelt fashion with no relevance to prizegiving ceremonies."

Hear, hear!
Thanks for putting my own thoughts about this into words.
(both to Colin Irwin for writing it for a large audience, and to Vic for apparently saying it first and giving Colin the idea, and for being a fine example of exactly what's described above)

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 13 Dec 11 - 03:58 AM

Gemma Kidney can explain herself here

L in C#
Who swears he will not get involved in this nonsense again

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 07:53 PM

Does anybody else find this difficult to understand? What is the glamourcave?

Who is or was Gemma Kidney?

Confused of Dorchester.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Bert
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 07:41 PM

If you are really interested in folk music why the F*** are you bothering with the BBC?

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 06:01 PM

Emma, you say in your blog: "The thirty per cent correlation - I got around to counting - between Alan Bearman's client list and this year's nominees doesn't look good.

Have you any evidence to substantiate your not-too-subtle insinuations or is this just semi-libellous tittle-tattle designed to stoke up more manufactured controversy? I rather suspect the latter.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 04:35 PM

I can and do understand the want to know who judged what after the event. However, asking to know beforehand is a bit much. It reeks of "I suspect people I don't know of doing something I don't know about at an unspecified time under conditions of which I'm unaware and since no one has had the smarts to keep me informed all along, well, I'd like to see their bank statements for the last year because I have a right to know because I am me."

Yeah, right!

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Howard Jones
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 02:20 PM

This FOI request was just a fishing expedition. There's no serious suggestion, let alone evidence, that there's anything fishy about the way acts are nominated. If the final list always seems to contain the usual suspects its because 1) the usual suspects are by definition among the best acts currently around and 2) normal bell-curve distribution.

The BBC has strict rules in place for awards, following some embarrassing fiascos. SmoothOps have stated that they follow the BBC's rules. The BBC's compliance officer has confirmed this. So what's the problem?

Emma seems to believe that because one of her favourite bands didn't get a mention that's evidence of a conspiracy. However an act which barely counts as folk and doesn't performs on the folk circuit is not likely to get onto the radar. It's quite possible that some of the judges may have heard of them, may even have nominated them, but unless the band has established a wide enough profile they're not going to get enough votes.

This of course is what Emma wants. She has made it clear that she wants to publish the names of judges so that bands can lobby them. This means that instead of nominations being based on an act's achievements they will depend on who has the best publicist.   I can't see how this benefits anyone, except perhaps publicists. And of course journalists.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Vic Smith
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 02:05 PM

Whoops!
"An article by Colin Irwin the the current fRoots.....

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Vic Smith
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 02:02 PM

An article by Colin Irwin in the current bemoans the predictability, the safeness, of being "geared towards the mainstream" etc. etc. of the folk awards.

... and I can't help feeling that he has been reading my widespead objections to the whole process when he writes:-

This wasn't right, said the dissenters. In whichever strange way you choose to define it, they said, folk music shouldn't be about judgement and trophies and music industry garlands, it was about real people making real music in an honest, heartfelt fashion with no relevance to prizegiving ceremonies.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Vic Smith
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 01:51 PM

Why the secrecy? What have they got to hide? By refusing the request they are making people smell a rat when there may be nothing amiss. What could be revealed? Only that some judges could have vested interests. It is small beer compared with other calls for FOI.

Surely openness in government, broadcasting channels and the companies that supply programmes is to be admired.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 01:17 PM

Surely the BBC although a separate corporation incorporated by Royal Charter is an emanation of the state for FoI purposes isn't it?

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: GUEST,Shining Wit
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 12:12 PM

Time to get some perspective. Pick up your instrument, get down the local session, play some tunes, have a few ales and laugh and then it all becomes clear: just take it for what it is.

Far more productive to make a fuss about the Tories royally effing up local radio and the problems that will cause - we don't need to alienate the only national folk show*. No doubt the money will go to the cowin' olympics coverage instead.




*I'm not an apologist for Smooth Ops (who produce some great programmes) or Mike Harding (whom I like but can't abide the show).

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Jack Campin
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 12:12 PM

FoI requests are supposed to be directed at agencies of the state, aren't they?

This whole award scheme is run by private companies, so how does FoI come into it?

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Morris-ey
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 11:58 AM

Emma

why not appeal to the Information Commissioner as suggested?

And why do you care anyway?

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 10:57 AM

Thanks for the clarification, Silas.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Silas
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 10:40 AM

I am not addressing you in particular, just a general enquiry. Why do we need to know who the judges are?

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 10:36 AM

If you're addressing me, I didn't suggest having a list of the judges would do any good; equally, after the event, I can't see that having the list of judges would do any bad, either.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Silas
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 10:16 AM

And just what good will having a list of the judges do?

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 10:09 AM

And that's the crux, Richard. However, a quick read of that document provided by the op says it will likely be easier to get the list of judges AFTER the awards. If the same FoI request were then submitted by the op or anyone else, I'd find that request to be more than reasonable. Before the event, no!

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: GUEST,OldNicKilby
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 09:54 AM

Could not agree more Richard. I have always had my suspicions

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Silas
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 09:53 AM

Oh God, not again.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 09:48 AM

Seems a perfectly proper request to me - the awards carry commercial significance and if they are bent we should know.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Silas
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 09:25 AM

Impossible to take this person seriously anyway after the 'Gemma Kidney' blog

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: GUEST,Shining Wit
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 09:08 AM

Agreed. Leave it. Please.

Subject: RE: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: Silas
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 08:49 AM

Good. Why don't you do us all a favour and just drop it?

Subject: Folk awards FoI request denied
From: EmmaHartley
Date: 12 Dec 11 - 08:47 AM

http://theglamourcave.blogspot.com/2011/12/freedom-of-information-request-for.html

It's all becoming very curious. If you know who the last person to submit this request was, I'd be interested to hear from them.