BuzzJack
Entertainment Discussion

Welcome, guest! Log in or register. (click here for help)

Latest Site News
 
Post reply to this threadCreate a new thread
> BBC 'not crammed full of soft liberals' says deputy chief
Track this thread | Email this thread | Print this thread | Download this thread | Subscribe to this forum
brian91
post 29th October 2006, 06:16 PM
Post #1
Group icon
You are a child of the universe
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 23,408
User: 78

One of the BBC's most senior executives has defended the corporation against accusations that it is "crammed full of soft liberals" obsessed with pushing a politically correct agenda.
In an exclusive interview, Mark Byford, the deputy director-general, has hit back at suggestions that the broadcaster is too sensitive to the feelings of Muslim viewers and that it has an inbuilt anti-Christian bias.

Mr Byford, 48, who has overall responsibility for the corporation's news division, refused, however, to rule out the possibility that a Muslim woman could read the news wearing a veil.
He also said he was "proud" of the BBC's decision to include an interview with the Taliban in an item about the conflict in Afghanistan.
"Our job in journalism is to communicate to the audience effectively the information we are delivering to them," he said. "As far as the issue of dress is concerned, it must not get in the way of the audience being able to receive the information in a clear and effective manner."
Asked specifically about the issue of a Muslim newsreader wearing a veil, he said: "The key is, if it does not hamper our primary obligation to deliver the news and information to our viewers and listeners then we would be respectful of that.
advertisement
"The key is that we would look at every single case and see it under that criterion. If the face is covered completely by the veil, then that is a different issue to something else. That's why we can't be that clear on it."
He added: "Do I believe that the BBC favours Islam compared to Christianity? Absolutely not. We absolutely recognise that the BBC has to reflect all faiths which are relevant within the UK."
Mr Byford, who joined the BBC as a researcher in 1979, spoke out after a week of turmoil in the organisation, which was sparked by revelations that some of its staff believe it has gone too far in the pursuit of multiculturalism.
Andrew Marr, the presenter, told an audience at an internal seminar that the organisation had an abnormally large number of young employees, ethnic minorities and gay people.
At the same event, executives including Alan Yentob agreed that while kosher food, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bible could be consigned to Room 101 – the BBC's fictitious depository of pet hates – the Koran could not.
Subsequent claims that the presenter Fiona Bruce would not be allowed to wear a small silver cross while reading the news provoked further concerns.
"I do not accept that the BBC is crammed full of soft liberals," said Mr Byford.
He said that the BBC drew on the talents of people from all faiths and backgrounds but insisted that it was not over-represented with people from the black and ethnic minority communities. "It is simply not true to say we are," he said.
Mr Byford also defended the BBC's decision to interview the Taliban spokesman in a recent piece about Afghanistan.
"I thought it was an outstanding piece of work and I back it 100 per cent. It was very responsibly done. It does the audience a disservice if we say that there are British troops fighting under a great deal of pressure but then we don't explain why the other side is fighting them."

Is the BBC still the British Broadcasting Corporation in 2006, or is it a subsidiary of Aljazeera.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Tim Barnes
post 29th October 2006, 06:26 PM
Post #2
Group icon
BuzzJack Platinum Member
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 12,423
User: 7

BBC = Blair Broadcasting Corporation
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Mushymanrob
post 29th October 2006, 07:42 PM
Post #3
Group icon
im all clares!
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 16,421
User: 5

andrew marr (political commontator and broadcaster) thinks the bbc has gone too far with its pc awareness.... he blames the liberal gay and jewish people who run the bbc...

anti christian but pro muslim is fine, the bible went into room 101, but the koran wasnt allowed too.... dry.gif
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
ghostwriter
post 30th October 2006, 10:20 AM
Post #4
Group icon
BuzzJack Enthusiast
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 955
User: 86

QUOTE(mushymanrob @ Oct 29 2006, 08:02 PM) *

andrew marr (political commontator and broadcaster) thinks the bbc has gone too far with its pc awareness.... he blames the liberal gay and jewish people who run the bbc...


That reminds me of Keith Chegwin's quote in "Extras" about the BBC. "Still run by Jews and queers is it?". I know that was a joke, but that suggests that Jewish people and gay people have held high positions at the BBC for quite some time. Stereotypically they are the two groups it is rumoured to be the most prominent in the entertainment industry.

Whether they are or not, it isn't a big deal if it's true or not really is it? Entertainment and media is a commerical industry, so they aren't going to just give propaganda. They broadcast what they think people want to see and hear. With regards to the Bible getting put in Room 101 and not the Koran, I suppose it may be to do with a lot of people being "ex-Christians" who had a religious upbringing but have since become atheist. It could also be to do with cultures from other countries being more deeply seemed with a religion, and the implication being if you slate another countries' religion, by implication you insult their culture and race. I'm not saying I agree with this view at all, I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind it.

While I agree it's ridiculous to have a newsreader who's face is covered in a veil (what would be the point, how would you understand her etc), I've got so tired of hearing some of these sort of "political correctness gone mad" stories and the spin certain newspapers like to put on it that I'm now suspicious there is much truth in them.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Have A Nice Day
post 9th November 2006, 12:27 PM
Post #5
Group icon
New Entry
Joined: 9 November 2006
Posts: 12
User: 1,923

QUOTE(Kimi Räikkönen @ Oct 29 2006, 06:47 PM) *

BBC = Blair Broadcasting Corporation

umm, don't you remember in 2003 when the Government sued the BBC? huh.gif
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
GRIMLY FIENDISH
post 9th November 2006, 12:56 PM
Post #6
Group icon
Always wear a clean pair of knickers, cos you never know when th
Joined: 12 March 2006
Posts: 18,586
User: 190

To be honest, I think this is utter rubbish... The Right Wing press and the Govt have had it in for the BBC for fukkin' YEARS now because it does not tow a particular party line. In the 80s and early 90s, it was the Conservative Govt having a go at them for supposed 'political bias', now it's the Labour party... I think we should look at the sort of people who it is that wants to reign-in the BBC and control it, and see where their interests lie....

The facts are that the vast majority of people in this country will trust the BBC a damn sight more for objectivity and free reporting than any newspaper that displays politically partisan views... Or indeed any other news broadcaster, such as CNN, Sky or Fox..... You want propaganda..? Look no further, these 'news broadcasters' are little more than the Western, pro-Neo-Con versions of Al Jazeera. Propaganda is propaganda, whether it's Neo-Con or Jihadist....

As for the Taliban Report, I absolutely applaud the BBC for doing it.... Investigative journalism is NOT as dead an art as I had feared....
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Ricky
post 9th November 2006, 01:09 PM
Post #7
Group icon
what you just said; I am already forgetting - Lena
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 28,988
User: 18

QUOTE(Have A Nice Day @ Nov 9 2006, 12:48 PM) *

umm, don't you remember in 2003 when the Government sued the BBC? huh.gif

Yes, and because of that anyone not with a Blair agenda got pushed, so the BBC is now mainly Blair Broadcasting Corporation
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Mushymanrob
post 9th November 2006, 04:13 PM
Post #8
Group icon
im all clares!
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 16,421
User: 5

QUOTE(ghostwriter @ Oct 30 2006, 10:41 AM) *

That reminds me of Keith Chegwin's quote in "Extras" about the BBC. "Still run by Jews and queers is it?". I know that was a joke, but that suggests that Jewish people and gay people have held high positions at the BBC for quite some time. Stereotypically they are the two groups it is rumoured to be the most prominent in the entertainment industry.

Whether they are or not, it isn't a big deal if it's true or not really is it? Entertainment and media is a commerical industry, so they aren't going to just give propaganda.


im not sure.... and im not sure wether or not subtle propaganda is a good thing. for eg, in the 90's it seemed that every kids presenter was gay or black, .... now that really doesnt matter to me at all, kids growing up watching tv got used to it as 'normal' (which of course it is)... making acceptance of gay and black people more acceptable... a good thing..

i think that be it in the bbc or politics (another area with a high jewish presence), whoever is in power will naturally push the topics they see as important. the question is.... how much is acceptable?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post


Post reply to this threadCreate a new thread

1 user(s) reading this thread
+ 1 guest(s) and 0 anonymous user(s)


 

Time is now: 29th April 2024, 04:15 PM