 sj |
||
|
||
The BBC are arseholes
|
|
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Backwoodsman Date: 13 Dec 20 - 06:29 AM Aaaaaaand....100! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Dec 20 - 05:47 AM I actually said that I wasn't moaning about not getting my money's worth in other areas of life, Nick, just that paying our taxes/licence fee, etc., whatever value we get or don't get, is all part of living in society. Now if an individual absolutely and religiously NEVER accesses any of the output covered by the licence fee, then they don't have to pay it. My old spinster aunt who was educated abroad and who never had children can't get a tax refund for the portion of tax that is spent on the education system, so, in a way, she's worse off than those non-fee payers who just get the occasional nudging letter. The odds are that she wouldn't moan about it. The BBC has to keep on at people who don't pay the fee because they mustn't make evasion too easy. It's only a bloody letter, not a court summons. The bald fact is that the vast majority of people do, at some time or another, access at least some of the stuff covered by the fee. If you make it a question of trust, I should think that half the bloody country wouldn't pay up. The nuisance Beeb letters are simply a reflection of that human failing, that we might not pay, even if we're supposed to, if we can get away with it. No need to get all indignant because you think the Beeb doesn't trust you. Every time you have to put a password into something it's because someone doesn't trust you. That's life, innit... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Raedwulf Date: 12 Dec 20 - 01:01 PM JHW & others - It's not the BBC. It's that company called Capita that nearly went tits up at the start of this year (I think it was this year). The TVLA is a fiction. It isn't an authority in any way, if it even has a bona fide existence. The BBC contracts out securing their revenue stream to debt collection companies (or companies that deal in such). Last time I had reason to look, Capita's contract covered about 96% of possible Licence Fee* payers and, of course, they've no reason to chase those who DO pay... But they're scumbags who think you owe them a living. Once upon a time they enclosed a pre-paid envelope with their letters (haven't seen one in 20 years, Jim); they stopped that a long time ago. They don't have a free-phone number. You owe them a living, despite the fact you owe the BBC nothing. Not having that. They insist that they have to check every two years, just in case you've suddenly decided to become a criminal (they don't say the bit after the comma, but that's the insulting implication of what they do say). Some 6-7 years ago, I know it cost 25-30p to print & mail out a simple letter. It depends on what bulk rate postage you can negotiate (so it's probably much more expensive now, given postage rises). The last time they sent one of their oiks round must have been at least 6-7 years ago, because they've been harassing me for at least 4-5, threatening me with an "investigation". Go ahead. They send me roughly one letter a month, on receipt of which I smile & dump it in the recycling bin. If they'd sent me a pre-paid envelope, I'd have told them nothing's changed. Instead, I'm happy to cost them money, because I see no reason why I should spend MY money, however few pennies, telling them they have no business with me. But they're arrogant, stupid, and think the world owes them a living... * I have no objection to the Licence Fee. The BBC has to be funded somehow, and as our only public & independent broadcaster, it has to be funded by the general Us, if you don't want our broadcasting to go the way of 'Murica. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 12 Dec 20 - 12:39 PM Mods - I can understand reasons for moving this thread down into BS. But that cancels guest Nick Dow, who is perhaps the best informed contributor to this topic of debate... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 12 Dec 20 - 12:05 PM At what point in recent history did the BBC start departing from public service values...??? My immediate personal bias is that thatcher's govt put pressure on the beeb to compete commercially, and the the pernicious rot set in...??? I may not be entirely wrong in blaming the tories, yet again... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 12 Dec 20 - 11:57 AM All very interesting, but not really the point. The fact that not getting your moneys worth in other areas of life somehow makes the TV licence OK is the old argument of 'Everybody else is paying why shouldn't you?' Complete rubbish. A gang of burglars break into somebody's home. 'What do you mean you don't want to be robbed? We've robbed three other houses tonight and they all paid up ! What makes you so special?' Ok I'm messing about a bit, but nobody has addressed the real point of the BBC abandoning Public Broadcasting Values. Do we just accept that and pay up? The other option is to start revising the values, then revising the revisions. A bit like saying the BBC is bang on target! Oh no not THAT target but this new one. No thanks. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,jim bainbridge Date: 12 Dec 20 - 11:45 AM I haven't watched live TV for many years (I think the Ashes series of 2005 was the last time) so I don't need a licence- it's an awful time-waster. The quality of the programmes is a personal view, but when I see TV in a hotel room, I am seriously unimpressed and normally end up watching 'One man and his dog' or just going back to the radio. I listen to BBC radio for news & my time in Ireland & Spain means I missed a lot of stuff now coming up on 4Extra, so am happy with that- I'd happily pay for a radio licence but that's not on offer! |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 12 Dec 20 - 11:28 AM .. oh and Sky as well.. forgot we watch most TV via the sky HD box... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 12 Dec 20 - 11:24 AM We pay BBC license, Prime, and Netflix.. The wife get's value for money from all of 'em as her teaching job is so exhausting and stressful she needs to unwind in her meagre spare time with comedy, rom com, and crime thriller boxset binges.. It also keeps her out my way while I get on with my stuff... I used to watch a movie or two, or my choice of tv series, on catch up after she's gone to bed.. However, since I tuned 60 I tend to nod off too easily sat on the sofa, so these days I mostly watch short videos on youtube.. On balance, we're ok continuing to pay the BBC licence if we must.. But I'm not so chuffed at my 89 year old mum being forced to pay it again, by devious tory govt shifting responsibility and blame to the BBC. So for the moment we're ignoring the demanding letters... Will they take a very frail elderly lady with dementia to court if she hasn't moved into a care home, or succumbed to covid in the meantime, while they're sending out enforcement demands...??? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Dec 20 - 11:10 AM Just having a telly doesn't oblige you to have a licence. You must have a licence if you watch TV programmes on any interface or if you download or record programmes. Now all these people who claim never to watch any telly, or the Beeb, etc. - tell me how to police that. It's my guess that extremely few people never access TV programmes. Here's the thing. Some people who never had children still pay taxes that support state schools. Likewise, people who send kids to private schools. I pay some of the highest council tax In the country, but I live half a mile from a public road down a private lane that is part my responsibility. I never see a policeman patrolling within a mile of my house and I have to hawk my refuse that half-mile to the main road every week. By the way, my council tax costs about fifteen times the cost of a TV licence. Oddly, I don't feel unfairly treated. Funny, that. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Rain Dog Date: 12 Dec 20 - 09:49 AM I pay the licence fee willingly as I watch a fair number of BBC programmes. I do not subscribe to any other TV services. The opposite is true for growing number of TV viewers yet they are forced to pay the licence fee. Not exactly fair is it? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 12 Dec 20 - 07:06 AM You are right about the price of the licence, of course up to a point the support for musical mediums. You are also correct about most of the programming. However you have to balance this against the compulsion of the TV licence and the wholesale abandoning of the Public Service Broadcasting values. I am afraid a 'poll tax' licence is not tenable in this day and age. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Dec 20 - 06:54 AM In an era in which you can be charged £14.99 to watch a single Premier League match, it strikes me that a licence fee of less than 50p per day is bloody good value. I listen to Radios 3 and 4 for hour after hour every day and never hear an ad. I listen to Classic FM (it's on right now) but the ads drive me mad. I'm very critical of the news coverage (no media outlet can get anywhere near to getting that right) but I regard most of the foreign and political correspondents highly. If there's political bias it's fairly subtle, but it does lean more to the right and "the establishment." Left-wing interviewees get a raw deal, whereas the right is far more indulged. Many of the leading lights come from a right-wing Tory background, viz Andrew Neil, Jeremy Paxman, Nick Robinson, Kamal Ahmed, giving the lie to accusations that the Beeb is a leftie hotbed. I'm a leftie and I'm frequently infuriated by the Beeb. The BBC makes some superb drama series and documentaries. It tries its best to entertain the masses, and reaction to their output will always be a personal matter. Strictly Come Dancing is a brilliant production with very high standards whether you love it or hate it. I can't stand the Michael McIntyre/Graham Norton Saturday night axis, but I have the choice. Cultural coverage is excellent, and I've always appreciated the Beeb's support for its symphony orchestras and its other ensembles, and The New Generation Artists scheme is a big success. I've lost touch with children's programmes, but my kids grew up with them, as indeed did I (Bill and Ben were the best, and don't argue). You can look at any aspect of what the BBC does and criticise, a bit like the EU. To me, having a multifaceted setup in which we all have a stake and about which we can all moan is integral to our style of democracy. So I'm a critical fan, and I support the licence fee. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Jos Date: 12 Dec 20 - 06:34 AM I do now have a television (given to me) and I watch it occasionally so I have a licence. It's less than 50p a day. But years ago I had a black and white television. At that time the colour really wasn't very good and I preferred not to see it. One day I had a telephone call from someone asking why I didn't have a colour television licence. I explained that I didn't need one. I had a black and white television licence. There was a pause, and then: "I see, so you just have a black and white colour-television-licence." |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,jim bainbridge Date: 12 Dec 20 - 06:23 AM Mind you, you need to be USING a TV in Britain. To watch TV in Ireland, you have to pay a licence- there are frequent threats on RTE- even non-resident TV owners (ie holiday house owners using their house for two weeks a year) need to pay a similar amount if they own a TV TV. There are many commercials on RTE as well as this need for a licence AND you do not need to USE your TV- if the only one you have has a broken cathode ray tube & out in the rain, you still have to pay! 'Television, television I'm sick from looking on television, I'm sick in the eyes, sick in the head likewis From sitting and looking on television' (Spinners calypso from the 60s) |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,jim bainbridge Date: 12 Dec 20 - 06:12 AM Re TV licence- they keep sending me bumf about how easy it is to pay for a TV licence. Don't do anything, write 'Merry Christmas' on it and stuff it in the prepaid return envelope. I do this with the crap leaflets from the Scottish Tory party as well- you don't need a stamp although my comment to them can vary from the greetings mentioned earlier. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,JHW Date: 12 Dec 20 - 06:01 AM Too much to read here, did try. 'i do not have television, but i appreciate bbc radio' Same here as Sandman but the BBC would rather keep sending letters asking why I have no licence. I've told them many times. BBC radio is though getting worse. Used to be music during trailers now its often in programmes so they get switched off too. Guess the BBC don't care. I once suggested a voluntary fee for radio only, like Wikipedia. Wouldn't now. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 09 Dec 20 - 01:00 PM Ake - welcome to the debate.. whatever faeces you care to bring in with you.. Since you appear to have developed mind reading powers since we last met, that could come in very handy... Though I'm sure Mr Dow is more tha capable of talking for himself, rather than have you voice his inner thoughts on his behalf...??? .. btw, seen anything good on the telly lately..... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 08 Dec 20 - 01:41 PM .. and yes I've also grown up with the entrenched preconception that the beeb is establishment old school tie tory to the core... It's our generation of 1980s alternative comedians and Polytechnic Media Studies/Communications degree graduates, who might have shaken the old natural order up a bit and tilted the balance, in more recent decades...??? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 08 Dec 20 - 01:11 PM Raedwulf - I am guilty of a somewhat knowingly hyperbolic sarcastic strategy in this thread... ..wind 'em up and reel 'em in.. I am a bit of a sod for teasing reactionary folk. Whichever side of the political spectrum they stink up... The clue is in my mudcat ID name... Though, I never expected a mudcatter of Nick's experience and stature to respond, so happily learn more from his posts, and defer to him... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Raedwulf Date: 08 Dec 20 - 09:20 AM The beeb will get painfully buggered from all directions of ideological fanatics...!!! Yes, precisely my point, pfr. Although even I didn't wax quite that eloquent! ;-) But you're guilty of it too. And no, not the far right, either. The "ordinary" right say the same things. If I run my eye down my social media list of friends, probably 95% of them that have expressed a political opinion are as much or further left as I. I don't have any far right friends, to the best of my knowledge. On the other hand, I live in a constituency that is not only solidly CON job (as opposed to LAB rats, before anyone accuses me of bias! ;-) ). So a lot of people I know round here are to the right of me. This was, in fact, a heavy Leave voting area. And some of them, frankly, are downright fucking ignorant (I have heard "I don't care, I just want out of the EU"), whilst otherwise being perfectly nice people. {shrug} It takes all sorts to make a world, don't it? And never be shy of questioning whether you're own prejudices / conditioning is on display. The BBC is not perfect, but it seems to me to have become rather less perfect in the last decade. It isn't an organisation that should be launching social crusades or trying to change the world which, alas, it does all too often give the appearance of doing in recent years. It certainly doesn't appear to left-leaning me to be a right wing mouthpiece; the opposite, if anything. That it seems to be tilting to my side of the fence is no less alarming, than if it were the other way. Its place is... next to the fence. Not on it. As I say, neutrality is very difficult to practice, let alone achieve. Balance is not. And the BBC, unfortunately seems to be tilting. That, genuinely, does worry me. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: robomatic Date: 07 Dec 20 - 09:52 PM Oh, lord, everyone wants to be paid. Guardian wants to be paid for reading their articles. Musicians want to be paid for contributing to other peoples' shows. Maybe they should pay attention to the strong arm of Bob Dylan who is being paid for his music in one big fell swoop. Must be some loose change in these tunes... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 07 Dec 20 - 08:12 PM Just this once I'm going to open my mouth unwisely and give a list of the better known and some lesser known celebrities I've interviewed. Not once did I behave like Marr, or any other aggressive BBC muppet. Yes the BBC gave me the chance to do all this, No I am not sad I left. I wonder how many of these would be interviewed today (and yes I know some are dead, but you know what I mean), and HOW they would be interviewed which is the point. I know I am opening myself up to criticism of behaving like the big I AM, which has never been my way but here goes... ROCK Ronnie Wood, Jack Bruce, Bill Wyman, Slash, The Pirates, Dr Feelgood, Wilko Johnson, The Troggs, Spencer Davis. Jerry Donahue. BLUES Sherman Robertson, Paul Byrd, Connie Lush, Lightning Slim, Lucy Zirins, Mem Shannon, The Blind Boys of Alabama, Albert Lee with Hogan's heroes, Alvin Youngblood Hart, Paul Jones, Nicky Moore, and many more. FOLK Martin Carthy, Cyril Tawney, Pete Coe, Dave Swarbrick, Maddy Prior, Bob Copper, Richard Thompson, Simon Nicol, Ric Sanders, Jez Lowe, Steve Turner, Len Graham, The Boys of the Lough, Martyn Wyndham Read, Tom Paxton, and many many more. Never once was there a bad word. Never once would I allow my guest to feel like some sort of victim. Never once would I consider myself to be more important than the guest, and every time we parted I was thanked for the interview. I don't deserve any particular accolade, I was trained to be a professional. It kept me in a job for 34 years. So now I feel I have the right to ask what the hell has happened to the BBC? I am disgusted with them. I was given a very revealing insight into the Rolling Stones early years by Bill Wyman. Why? because I was actually interested in his music and his knowledge which is extensive when it comes to Blues, and not who he was sleeping with. He told me how much he enjoyed talking, likewise Micky Moody. When the interview was over we carried on talking for twenty minutes. The same with Martin Turner (Wishbone Ash) we ended up discussing Gypsy wagons and their painting. So please excuse my name dropping, but the point is shouldn't every interview be based on some perimeters of respect, and not a Jeremy Kyle sadistic confrontation. That to me is not broadcasting. However I'm seeing it more and more, and I've retreated hurt. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 07 Dec 20 - 07:20 PM Yes that's why they should not throw the rulebook in the bin and let Marr loose with his brain in neutral and his gob in overdrive. This is exactly the sort of behaviour I was trained not to do, and the BBC are now condoning. Like I said it's asking for trouble. Like you said, they're going to get it. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 07 Dec 20 - 06:05 PM I won't go out of my way to watch farage on the telly.. I'm sure he's probably an ok enough bloke to have a pint and jolly banter with.. .. even well suited to a career as a TV talk show host.. but..maybe not the best choice for prime minister. Anyway, even if the BBC could always maintain a fair unbiased balance right across the board, neutrality and objective impartiality are anathema to political and religious extremists.. The beeb will get painfully buggered from all directions of ideological fanatics...!!! |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 07 Dec 20 - 04:38 PM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JTT1vHnjyI Whatever your political views this is about as unbiased as starving Rottweiler. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 07 Dec 20 - 04:15 PM So what did you think of the Farage Andrew Marr interview then? Talk about asking for trouble. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 07 Dec 20 - 03:33 PM When the far right bash the beeb for being too marxist feminist BLM satanist paedo etc lefty.. What they really mean is the BBC is not gratuitously arse-licking farage, trump, and their even more extreme nutcases, sufficiently as they demand...... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Raedwulf Date: 07 Dec 20 - 03:14 PM Unless you're one of them right wing BBC bashers Left wing BBC bashers, you mean, pfr, surely? ;-) I'm mildly left of centre; many of my friends are further left. What I hear more often is that the BBC is a Tory poodle, etc... That's what you get for trying to be... balanced. Not neutral. Neutral is far harder & stops you saying so many things. Balanced means doing your best to present an equal view from both sides. Are the BBC perfect? No. But I still think they're the best thing we've got, in that regard... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Malcolm Storey Date: 07 Dec 20 - 02:35 PM Are you on messanger dick? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 06 Dec 20 - 03:07 PM Yes.. very unamerican of us... Shocking...!!! .. give us an inch, and we might start saying why our NHS is such a better idea... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,paperback Date: 06 Dec 20 - 02:42 PM British Bullshite above the line? Quell surprise... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 06 Dec 20 - 02:28 PM Nick - thanks for that.. Yes, I am already aware of most of the context you have just provided, and personally agree with you that that BBC is on it's last legs, Please forgive me for prodding you a bit, but the result is this excellent informed summary of yours. This thread is now the better for it. We all are dissatisfied with the beeb one way or another. Though 'Normal' middle of the road political centrists should be the driving force in shaping whatever future the BBC has remaining.. I really haven't exaggerated the extent of bonkers far right hate, I just hope their voice are not taken too seriously, as the fate of the BBC is being decided.. It'd be sad to see the end of the BBC, or at least the public service principles it was founded on. But the world changes for better or worse, and life goes on... cheers.. pfr... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 06 Dec 20 - 02:01 PM Ok I'll try and explain this to you. Firstly as I said I worked for the BBC for 34 years, so thanks for giving me a bit of credit for that. The BBC does not exist in a vacuum. It has never been BBC against the rest of the world. Sorry, but the BBC is already in bed with numerous other broadcasters, Murdoch included. There are hardly any in house productions any more. The BBC have been farming out work to independent companies for years. Most continuity broadcasters have their own companies. This is how Jeremy Vine can pop up on Channel five, and still work for the BBC. The news gathering machine does not exist in splendid isolation, there is an all round cooperation between all news gatherers. If you walk into production you will find there are numerous journo's on the phone to ITV, Sky, Reuters, and US news gatherers. So then what's the problem? Basically the compulsion of the TV licence, and the mock impartiality of the corporation are not going to be tolerated. There is also the downright duplicity shown by some producers i.e. Bashir and Diana interview, and the atrocious reversal of film footage during the miners strike, that are also leaving a bad taste in the mouth of....Well who? No not the 'football thug right' or any capitalist conspiracy, but the ordinary consumer. Finally you will be hard put to it to find any public school collar and ties in the corporation. Quite the opposite in fact. (Well I suppose there are a few). What has happened is the corporation has become lazy, and self aggrandised and impervious to criticism. I honestly think that finding some conspiracy theory about foreign media tycoons and believing it is way off the mark, since the Beeb have been trading with them for years. The last thing the media tycoons want is another free enterprise rival. By the way Sky news is being accused of being more left wing than the BBC in the business! So how does that work out? So honestly Punk forget right wing conspiracies, half of them haven't got the brains they were born with anyway, it's just an ever so British broadcaster who is deaf in one ear and can't hear out of the other. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 06 Dec 20 - 12:03 PM Nick - from what I've read over the years in your mudcat posts, you're a folkie bloke I can respect, so would rather avoid falling out with you.. The reality is, as a well informed educated consumer of media, I do know very much what I'm talking about.. As a a 'creative' involved over decades in various facets of the 'arts' [ that looks pretentious and wanky...], I have some experience of engaging with it. AND as a keen observer of right wing fanatics, I spend far too much time online in their company absorbing their mostly confused and contradictory hatred of the BBC.. Most of the 'foot soldiers' I encounter do not have your years of experience, and insider informed opinions of the poor state of the BBC. All they feed on is pernicious conformist propagandising and indoctrination from their right wing peers and influencers. Many of whom are obvious puppets of foreign media tycoons.. We can agree the most probable pragmatic future for the BBC is to be radically shaken by it's public school collar and tie, becoming a leaner and more efficient subscription service.. But even after, if that happens, I expect the insidious anti BBC disinformation and hatred will persist in being sown by foreign media rivals and their allied UK far right political & media dogmatists.. Relentlessly stirring up rancour amongst the lesser educated 'football thug right'. Pernicious hatred that will continue to fester until victory is theirs, and the BBC is mercilessly kicked to death...??? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 06 Dec 20 - 10:44 AM Punk it really helps when you post if you have some idea what you are talking about. The suggestion is that the BBC becomes a subscription service, or runs advertisements i.e. not funded by a outdated poll tax type of system. It is nothing to do with right or left politics, it is failing miserably as a public service broadcaster, and needs replacing. As it stands it is only answerable to itself and has compulsory funding at our expense. That is not sustainable in this day and age. Try explaining to a 21 year old student why he/she has to buy a licence when he/she does not watch the channel regularly, and already pays for another provider. All that is being suggested is it becomes independent, like ITV. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: The Sandman Date: 06 Dec 20 - 10:43 AM because they are deluded public school brainless twerps |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 06 Dec 20 - 10:23 AM My concern about the BBC getting dismantled and sold off to foreign asset strippers for scrap, is it's supposed to be a BRITISH broadcasting PUBLC SERVICE.. All these right wing zealot so called patriots who want to replace it with a vacuum for Murdoch and his like to flood into and fill with over-commercialised propaganda crap, are either befuddled and confused useful idiots; or deceptive bribed shills... What a bunch of phony British patriots...!!! If these ideologues really cared about our national identity, they'd want to see the BBC kicked up the arse into a better improved condition, and our real traditional British Broadcasting principles and standards defended and preserved... Why are these deluded fools so determined to have our BBC sold off to unscrupulous foreign billionaire media barons...!!!????????? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Pete from seven stars link Date: 06 Dec 20 - 08:45 AM Many of us would only be too happy to get our songs heard by a wide audience and not get paid , but it’s a personal decision as to whether it’s worth it , but good for them sticking to their guns . But at least they got some newspaper coverage out of it ! I don’t think I would be too upset if the beeb goes down , along with the grossly overpaid presenters . At least it’s employment for quite a lot of non celebs |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: The Sandman Date: 06 Dec 20 - 01:25 AM I will call, if i can reverse the charges, why dont you call me, thanks, stay safe |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Malcolm Storey Date: 05 Dec 20 - 06:55 PM Thanks both Freddy and Nick. Dick if your reference to fees is what I think it is you might want to give me a call. cheers |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 05 Dec 20 - 09:20 AM Still there Malcolm and still relevant, sadly. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: FreddyHeadey Date: 05 Dec 20 - 08:02 AM post about Whitby,,, maybe lost amongst the adverts thread.cfm?threadid=168957&page=2#4081958 |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Malcolm Storey Date: 05 Dec 20 - 06:29 AM So what happened to the post I made last night re Whitby & the BBC? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 05 Dec 20 - 05:26 AM Sorry I should have made it plain. The fact that a BBC muppet has an I.D. card round his neck and was trained by the BBC did not mean he was working for them. Most presenters used to have their own company i.e. 'A general Widgett production for the BBC'. This all changed in 2017 when the employment laws changed. The BBC then became liable as an employer, and the s**t weasel's kicked everybody into touch who was not prepared to take the financial hit as a result. 'We've got to pay your N.I. and PAYE, so we're reducing your take home pay. (from naff all to less than naff all) If you kept submitting under 'General Widgett' you were not allowed to use BBC facilities. Not all their fault admittedly, but guess which programmes were chopped first? Guess where the money went! The rest you know. Sorry for being so miserable but it's not something that can easily be forgiven if you actually care about music. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 05 Dec 20 - 05:04 AM Aaaaah!!! The wonderful BBC sound balance. Those muppets could not run a bath let alone a sound desk. The prats stuck a mic in the public toilet at one gig, to use as a echo chamber. You couldn't make it up. I did an OB from a festival with a sound muppet using the radio van. Only one thing wrong with that. The donut did not know how to raise the radio mast. I ended up broadcasting by the side of three large dustbins, and interviewing well known acts because it was the only place to get reception. I'd have done better using my mobile. The BBC do not seem to have heard of Bass as a concept in music. Take a listen to some of their old recordings on line and you'll see. They also think they are far more important than the musicians. Bollocks to BBC copyright! That was an outright lie. That's why I released the recordings through my own company. Any problems I called Malcolm Storey to come and sort them out. Very effective! They all ran away while I put my tin hat on! |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: The Sandman Date: 05 Dec 20 - 05:02 AM Malcolm, might i compliment you on the general running of the festival you ran the Festival very well, it was efficently organised |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: The Sandman Date: 05 Dec 20 - 04:58 AM on the subject of waiting for fees,,alcolm does that ring any bells? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Malcolm Storey Date: 04 Dec 20 - 08:12 PM Regarding me showing the BBC the metaphorical door the recent posts on recordings etc reminded me of further dealings with them. In the one of my early years involved at Whitby the BBC did indeed do some recordings at Whitby. After I was alerted to problems with their demands and interference with concert schedules - pratting about with mics etc - I made sure I was at the next event they were to record. After watching the sound crew clown about through the first act I asked the producer to stop the recording and we would discuss the matter in the morning. It got a little bit heated but I pointed out that the audience had paid to enjoy the performers without his bunch of amateurs stomping all over everything. I also pointed out I knew where the main switchboard was! They improved after that. On that occasion the arrangement had not been made by myself although apparently there was a promise of some sort of arrangement/access fee and copies of all the recordings - I'm still waiting. Subsequently the next time we were approached I suggested that the very least they could offer was copies of recordings and notification of any future use with a chance to preview same. I was told that the copying would need to be paid for, always provided it could be released as it was BBC COPYRIGHT!!!! That was when the door was pointed to (metaphorically)! |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 04 Dec 20 - 03:49 PM With respect, that would ensure them no work at all with the BBC. They are very far from union friendly if it affects them. The BBC have always had a 'very small cheques tartan' policy for decades. The way it works, is they will employ an act for £xx, then when the act is rebooked, and asks for £yy after knocking his pipe out getting well known, the answer is you did it for £xx last time, you can do it for that or we'll get somebody else. The only way you can break this, is by pulling an audience that they cannot argue against. Here's a good example Paul Jones used to name his own fee for the Blues show due to his position in the music world when there were other musicians who were better broadcasters. You see it again and again, fame beats talent in broadcasting with the BBC. Look what happened to Mike Harding. Union representation will see the door slammed very loudly. Sorry. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Georgina Boyes Date: 04 Dec 20 - 02:10 PM Are the band members of Musicians' Union? If they are, have the Union been involved. If they aren't, they might now see the benefits of joining. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Big al Whittle Date: 04 Dec 20 - 01:43 PM A while back, I asked if they had kept a fabulous little series that jazz pianist Lennie Felix done in the 1960's. Every week he had aguest - I remember with particular pleasure Ben Webster and Jimmy Witherspoon's appearances. Answer came there none. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle Date: 04 Dec 20 - 01:38 PM Theres really no excuse for wiping anything. You can store as much on an SD card as would take up a warehouse at one time. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 04 Dec 20 - 08:46 AM With reference to 'wiping' programmes. A certain local radio station employed an unpaid disabled man to wipe and splice tape, for re-use. When DAT came in it was copy or lose. When DAT was superseded, it was copy or be erased, when 'Radio Man' came in, (£14 million of complete crap without the ability to make a music edit) it was automatic erasure after 30 days. 'So don't think you can have a four week tour and record your show, and we're not paying some one to put it on for you. Find a mate if you've got any, and he'd better come in when we say so, we've sacked the night staff. Don't think you can come in and work after 9pm on a Sunday! We switch the alarms on, we don't care that your show goes out until then. No you can't have a key for the alarms, we don't care that you've been here 30 years, you're not mainstream and never will be, you'll have to find time to record it if your going off somewhere playing ..what was it again? Oh yes Folk Music or some other sort of rubbish. You fit in with us, after all we are the mighty BBC. Yes an aptly named thread. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Backwoodsman Date: 04 Dec 20 - 08:24 AM I’m not even going to ask! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 04 Dec 20 - 06:48 AM British Bumhole Corporation...??? .. and, despite it's serious problems, I'll still defend the BBC.. With perhaps futile hope it can improve and survive...????? [btw.. in international p0rno, "BBC" has acquired an entirely different popular new meaning...] |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Hagman Date: 04 Dec 20 - 06:36 AM Surely it should be "The BBC is an arsehole"? Grammatical standards, please... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Joe G Date: 03 Dec 20 - 06:20 PM Nope Steve - me too. The very diversity of programming of the BBC is what makes it so valuable. However they got it very wrong here - I've seem Amaraterra and they are a tremendous band and very much deserved to be paid a good fee. I'm a staunch defender of Auntie Beeb but this was a wrong decision - though to be fair it may be one made by the production company without the BBC's knowledge. I hope that was the case |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 03 Dec 20 - 06:18 PM There's got to be a sensible balance between the commercial wing of the BBC, who can remain motivated working to monetise previously much loved dodgy old sit coms, etc; and the younger generation of puritan PC influencers within BBC culture who are keener to cancel and obliterate all cultural artifacts that offend them. Somewhere between them, must be wriggle room for objective minded media historian archivists, academics, and dedicated amateur enthusiasts... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Dec 20 - 06:10 PM Am I the only person here who sees nothing wrong in principle with a podcast about female orgasm? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,CJB666 Date: 03 Dec 20 - 05:59 PM For many years there has been an active loose-knit group of OTR enthusiasts researching and seeking out recordings of programmes produced by such as Michael Mason, Charles Chilton, Charles Parker, A.L.Lloyd, Ewan MacColl, and Philip Donnellan (to name but a few). They produced epic films and series of musical docudramas, many focusing upon contemporary social mores and social deprivation. However the powers that be in the BBC hierarchy did not approve of the content of many of their programmes. And if they reluctantly did the programmes were only ever aired once (as evidenced in Genome). Philip Donnellan was particularly worried that after an airing his programmes would be wiped, so he made extra sure to take a copy home at the end of the day. Indeed many of our discoveries and rescues of lost or forgotten programmes have been because producers took stuff home with them. This is not apocryphal; one now-retired member of the BBC Archives reported: that when he was told to wipe a whole series of I'm Sorry I'll Read That Again he took the tapes home instead. However the older staff have become increasingly friendly towards those like the OTR fraternity in helping to rescue and preserve recordings of the above named producers. They realise that their works will never be aired again due to woke and PC attitudes of the younger know-it-all-but-know-nothing generation. After all if these younger staff want to produce programmes about female orgasms, sex cults, or comedy which only consists of profanities, then there's no room for quality programmes such as 'The Long March of Everyman,' 'The British Seafarer,' or such as Charles Parkers' 'Radio Ballads.' So the Archivists are being very helpful to us. And now the great fear is that there'll be a cull of non-woke / non-PC programmes from the Archives. These programmes are too non-PC ever to be aired again, so why make room for them in the dusty archives? Better to simply junk the masters. Alf Garnett will never be aired again, ditto 'It Ain't Half Hot Mum.' The BBC is well practiced in wiping and junking recordings - it has been doing it for years. And folk and jazz has been at the for-front - such programme are routinely wiped even now. But God help us if the young 'wokes' ever get hold of the Archives. ==== very It is |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 03 Dec 20 - 04:22 PM By the way having re-read the thread, Yes I did pay the musicians in both Folk and Blues for live concert performances. I considered interviews to be free advertising, and if they guest played live they were offered a copy of the recording licenced under my own label to do with as they wanted. I received no money at all from this. Like I said old school broadcasting, a thing of the past I fear. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Nick Dow Date: 03 Dec 20 - 04:06 PM Ok here is an informed view. I worked for the BBC for 34 years as a radio presenter. I have covered OB work, and live music in and out of Folk and Blues, as well as mainstream continuity work. The BBC I joined in 1984 was keen to give youngsters like me a chance and supported all minority music interests. Latterly thanks to Russell Brand and Jonathon Ross and their disgraceful behaviour, we were all retrained in risk assessment (!) and diversity, and impartiality. Slowly but surely the broadcasting quality declined. The mindless programme pushing became mandatory, and was demanded at quarter past and quarter to the hour, even if you were in the middle of an interview. We ended up with the bloody ridiculous situation of introducing Sherman Robertson live, and interrupting it with a advert for a gardening programme. I asked the muppets in charge 'Are you trying to irritate the listeners into joining the programme? Back came the Answer 'Yes it works.' The mandatory training became more and more ludicrous. I knew how to present my programme from a middle of a river full of alligators should I go on safari. (Yes Honestly!) The final straw was when the government and the BBC decided to change the terms of employment. I went one week later. As if by magic every single value hammered into us by numerous trainers and producers went west. Slowly impartiality became a pretence. The Brexit arguments were undermined right left and centre. Whatever your view, it should be displayed equally by a public service broadcaster. Reports were qualified with 'Despite Brexit this has happened.' 'Despite the strike the other has happened' Brexit for and against guest numbers were drastically unbalanced. When questioned about this live on 'Question time' the presenter sneered 'Just answer the question!' BBC TV was no better, and the presentation style became embarrassing to an old school broadcaster like myself. All of the values seemed to have gone, and the bias was even finding it's way into the soap operas. I am sad disillusioned and bloody angry. The movements to defund the BBC and the non payment of the licence are becoming more understandable, and this by one who was funded by the same for many years. I now feel the BBC's days are numbered, and it will become a subscription service. That will be a sad but necessary day. They only have themselves to blame. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Helen Date: 03 Dec 20 - 02:48 PM Rupert Murdoch. Australia's best export! If he stays out of our country it's good but unfortunately he still has media interests here. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 03 Dec 20 - 12:46 PM That is a disgraceful waste of British TV license dodgers no money... The BBC should only make British programs about British people doing British things. No wonder righ minded British people are determined to get the BBC closed down, and it's marxist feminist BLM satanist paedo management banged up in prison. The sooner the evil unpatriotic BBC is replaced by that common sense talking Rupert Murdoch, the better off Britain will be...!!! |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,CJB666 Date: 03 Dec 20 - 12:20 PM Almost literally anal. More licence fee funds are being spent in a scurrilous podcast series on female orgasm; or actually physical, spiritual, and financial abuse of vulnerable women. Not serious research either, but an expose of a cult - One Taste - in America - where else? - that charges $12,000 or more for a weekend of men sticking their fingers into women. That is where the women pay, the men go free. If you are so interested enough to bother, the website is here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08xzn13 ==== |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,henryp Date: 03 Dec 20 - 08:14 AM Fare enough! |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Dec 20 - 07:34 AM That's just about fifteen quid per taxi ride. Not bad in this day and age, I'd say... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,henryp Date: 03 Dec 20 - 07:28 AM The BBC spent £25,000 on 1,631 taxi journeys - all of which were unused by its globetrotting staff. I read it in the Mail, so it must be true. At least it's going to a good home. Life is fares, as they say down the shelter. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Jim Knowledge Date: 03 Dec 20 - 06:10 AM I `ad that `enryp in my cab the other day. `e won`t go on the buses or tube `cos nobody wears masks but very glad I was too. Fares are thin on the ground in London at the moment. I said, " Morning `enryp. You eaten a wasp or something?" `cos `is face looked like `e was well in pain." `e said, "Jim, `ave you seen that Mudcat thread about the BBC? A million and a `alf quid of licence payers dosh to put the records on!!" I said, "Yeah, I `ave. Blimey, if that is the case the blame lies with those `ho make the offers. They`re unfit for purpose and in need of counselling. Arseoles? I would describe them as both parts of a womans anatomy!!" Whaddam I Like?? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: The Sandman Date: 03 Dec 20 - 03:26 AM my remark had nothing to do with gargoyle he happened to post in between it was a reply to Jos. ubject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Jos - PM Date: 02 Dec 20 - 03:37 PM The BBC may not have commercial advertisements but they are constantly advertising themselves. And why does Radio 4 keep airing their promotion of TV licences? With a gentle friendly voice and soft music presumably designed to make listeners who are over 75 think "Oh, how lovely that now we have to pay for our TV licences." You DON'T NEED a television licence to listen to the radio. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Helen Date: 03 Dec 20 - 03:10 AM What is the relevance of your statement to Gargoyle's stated opinion? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: The Sandman Date: 03 Dec 20 - 03:00 AM teach your grand mother to suck eggs |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Helen Date: 03 Dec 20 - 02:52 AM Teaxch? Nope. No Google results. So is there a need to shout? And I can't see the relevance of your statement to Gargoyle's stated opinion? Although, gargoyle (- nice to see you here again at Mudcat, BTW -) there might be some other threads more worth looking at than this one which may already be halfway down the gurgler even though it is less than 24 hours old. You can try Googling "going down the gurgler" but it looks like the websites are being a bit too nice. "Gurgler" = "toilet" |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: The Sandman Date: 03 Dec 20 - 01:25 AM Look the phrase up by googling, gargoyle |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 02 Dec 20 - 04:55 PM Sandman - TEAXCH GRAND MOTHER SUCK EGGS. I do not understand? Sincerely, Gargoylr Clones - Please remove to the lwer kingdo. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: The Sandman Date: 02 Dec 20 - 04:35 PM ARE YOU TRYING TO TEAXCH YOUR GRAND MOTHER HOW TO SUCK EGGS? |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 02 Dec 20 - 04:33 PM It has always been my stance: If it is performed and recorded in ANY format, Sincerely, Gargoyle |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Jos Date: 02 Dec 20 - 03:37 PM The BBC may not have commercial advertisements but they are constantly advertising themselves. And why does Radio 4 keep airing their promotion of TV licences? With a gentle friendly voice and soft music presumably designed to make listeners who are over 75 think "Oh, how lovely that now we have to pay for our TV licences." You DON'T NEED a television licence to listen to the radio. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: The Sandman Date: 02 Dec 20 - 03:16 PM i do not have television, but i appreciate bbc radio ,it is a pleasure not to have to arseholes advertising their products, which is the case on comercial and rte [irish radio] the only radio station in ireland that does not have adverts is the irish speaking radio nag |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Dave Hanson Date: 02 Dec 20 - 02:19 PM Arseholes are cheap today, Cheaper than yesterday, Little boys are half a crown, Standing up or lying down, ? Dave H |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 02 Dec 20 - 01:54 PM manufactured Pop group be talent show series.. (bloody submit button is too close to the preview button on my tiny phone screen..) |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 02 Dec 20 - 01:52 PM Steve - as usual I was being sarcy, taking the piss out of the old grumps who do think it's shite. It's not my cup of tea, but mudcat regulars should know by now, I'm a relentless defender of Pop culture.. My Mrs loves it, and anything that keep her so glued to the telly and not getting in my way while I'm cooking, is fine by me... We actually both enjoyed the recent Little mix search for a new |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Dec 20 - 01:13 PM My family, close and extended, are all massive fans of Strictly. This means that I get to see bits of it, generally when I'm dipping in and out of the kitchen cooking the tea. Whatever you think of such shows, Strictly is most assuredly not shite. It's an extremely well-produced show with very high production standards and, occasionally, some stunning dancing by the team of professionals. And the music is performed live. It's also clear that the professionals get many of the celebs to a very high standard of dancing in a very short time. Knock it for being what it is by all means, but shite it ain't. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 02 Dec 20 - 12:44 PM So.. one thing 99% of us can agree on, is the BBC wastes far too much money on high profile celebrity presenters... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Malcolm Storey Date: 02 Dec 20 - 12:41 PM When the BBC wanted carte blanche to record at Whitby Folk Week without offering a fee I politely showed them the metaphorical door. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,guest Date: 02 Dec 20 - 12:36 PM Not in front of the children please Jack! I know a 90 year old who thinks strictly is wonderful! You would think she would know better. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle Date: 02 Dec 20 - 11:47 AM Is there any BBC person who hasn't got you to play for free. They all do it. I don't really mind. The commercial stations aren't going to play us -other than if by a 'monkeys on typewriters' kind of thing we we write a hit record. In which case they pay you when they play your record. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,henryp Date: 02 Dec 20 - 11:47 AM Strictly Come Dancing 2020; The NTA and Bafta award-winning entertainment show produced by BBC Studios returns with more sparkle, glitz and glamour than ever. The BBC has defended a decision to have a same-sex pairing on the new series of Strictly Come Dancing after receiving complaints from viewers about the move. The corporation said Strictly was "an inclusive show" and that it had been "happy to facilitate" Nicola Adams' request to be partnered with a woman. Strictly has previously featured two male professionals dancing together in a one-off routine, when Johannes Radebe and Graziano di Prima performed to Emeli Sande's Shine last year. Some applauded the show for the routine, but the BBC received 189 complaints from viewers who found it offensive. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST Date: 02 Dec 20 - 11:07 AM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE Harlan Ellison addressed the situation. Circumstance is different, but the principle remains the same. PAY THE PERFORMERS. The rant has a few words you may not wish sensitive ears to hear. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: leeneia Date: 02 Dec 20 - 10:24 AM Not paying the band? That's shameful. Thanks for posting, Jack. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 02 Dec 20 - 09:54 AM Peter - uh-oh.. .. now you've risked stirring up the 'true folkies do it for love, not money' brigade... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 02 Dec 20 - 09:50 AM ANONYMOUS GUEST - ?????????? Would you like to try posting a less confused/confusing rewrite.. Take your time, we're not in any hurry... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,Peter Date: 02 Dec 20 - 09:48 AM Pay a folk band? Whoever heard of such a thing? This has just reminded me that I spent two years never quite getting around to going to one of the band's gigs. I must do better in 2021 |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST Date: 02 Dec 20 - 09:42 AM " Unless you're one of them right wing BBC bashers who'll have a gratuitous go at Aunty Beeb for any opportunist reason.." Not to be confused with the left wing BBC bashers who'll have a gratuitous go at Aunty Beeb for any opportunist reason.. From what I see on the web and in the press the BBC is supposedly run by a bunch of dangerous left wing revolutionaries who mindlessly churn out Tory government propaganda. Perhaps they are getting the balance right. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: GUEST,henryp Date: 02 Dec 20 - 09:19 AM Never saw Jack as a Strictly spectator. You never can tell. While Gary Lineker has topped the BBC salary list this year, he will be taking a £400,000 pay cut after signing a new five-year deal with the broadcaster. Yes, Gary, times are tough for everybody. That will leave Zoe Ball in first place. 1. Gary Lineker – £1,750,000-£1,754,999 2. Zoe Ball – £1,360,000-£1,364,999 13. Claudia Winkleman – £365,000-£369,999 also a Strictly presenter. |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 02 Dec 20 - 09:06 AM I'm one of them grumpy cultural snobs who'd never watch such a shite show anyway. But in an attempt at some kind of objective perspective.. Is it actually fully a BBC production, or contracted out to an independent media producer...??? Not saying beeb is entirely blameless in this case, it is after all responsible for maintaining standards under it's watch, but let's try to stay focused on who actually dunnit... If it is down to the miserly attitude of a dickhead employee of an indie production company, then that's really who should be hung drawn and quartered... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Dec 20 - 08:51 AM Well, Zoe Ball, who fronts the show, is either the highest or second-highest Beeb earner (admittedly she does wireless too). Just sayin'... |
|
Subject: RE: The BBC are arseholes From: punkfolkrocker Date: 02 Dec 20 - 08:25 AM What.. all the BBC...??? every single one of 'em in the entire corporation, all around the planet...!!!????? .. that's taking guilt by "joint enterprise" a bit too far.. innit..??? Think you might wannna at least narrow it down to specific individuals producing just one show...????? Unless you're one of them right wing BBC bashers who'll have a gratuitous go at Aunty Beeb for any opportunist reason.. Which Jack surely you aint...????????????????????? |
|
Subject: The BBC are arseholes From: Jack Campin Date: 02 Dec 20 - 07:46 AM Exploiting the pandemic to strongarm musicians into playing for free. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/dec/02/strictly-bbc-dropped-us-after-we-asked-to-be-paid-say-musicians |
| Share Thread: |
