Topics about the BBC
:sunglasses: 28.6 % :grinning: 71.4 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
 
By Kreuzberger
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#560324
Oh, that explains everything! A copy/paste from Lucinda or Horatio, the intern, settles all the fears that are widespread throughout the broadcast and press media that BBC News and Politics teams are absolutely rotten to the core.
 
By The Weeping Angel
Membership Days Posts
#560325
Kreuzberger wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:06 am
Oh, that explains everything! A copy/paste from Lucinda or Horatio, the intern, settles all the fears that are widespread throughout the broadcast and press media that BBC News and Politics teams are absolutely rotten to the core.
Why would the BBC hire an actor?
 
By MisterMuncher
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#560326
Even if we assume her thespian ambitions are off the table, why have the BBC presented her as a "reverend" when she's an internet crank? A lie of omission at the very least.

(Yes, yes, all religions and their staff are inherently ridiculous, bit it's fairly obvious that they were saying little of her sect etc. so the default assumption would be she was CoE or something equally anodyne and respectable. Mention internet ordination to anyone, is either for doing a friend's wedding or for people who wear their pants on their head)
 
By Kreuzberger
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#560332
The Weeping Angel wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:16 am
Kreuzberger wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:06 am
Oh, that explains everything! A copy/paste from Lucinda or Horatio, the intern, settles all the fears that are widespread throughout the broadcast and press media that BBC News and Politics teams are absolutely rotten to the core.
Why would the BBC hire an actor?
Indeed, why would they?
 
By Kreuzberger
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#560333
visage wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:21 am
If she self-identifies as a woman of the cloth we simply have to accept it.

And I suspect this wouldnt be an issue had she appeared and endorsed Jezza.
Providing a platform for any old charlatan is not provided for in the BBC charter. That is the the issue and this is just one more instance of it.
 
By bluebellnutter
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#560339
Is there not a certain level of hypocrisy here? If this was being done on the other side of the debate this would be being dismissed as conspiracy theory, but because people agree with the side the woman opposed it's become a "thing". It is, of course, quite possible that this woman may well be someone who is both an extra-playing actress AND someone who runs a batshit mad mentalist right-wing "church" on the internet. Loads of people do multiple things.

If this is indeed some sort of conspiracy it's the most cack-handed, lazy one in history, which frankly leads me to think it's probably not.
 
By Kreuzberger
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#560340
Were this a one off, I believe that it would have raised the odd snigger and we would have all moved on.

Now, while it is perfectly possible that the production team was hoodwinked and a rogue slipped herself in via the focus group recruitment agency that supplies these supposedly representative samples. That agency is required to back-check respondents/interviewees, as mandated by the The Association for Qualitative Research. As the user of these samples, you rarely see the respondents until the day of the session but any frauds are easily spotted and you ask them to leave. Simple. You don't want false data through insincere opinion.
It is, of course, quite possible that this woman may well be someone who is both an extra-playing actress AND someone who runs a batshit mad mentalist right-wing "church" on the internet. Loads of people do multiple things.
Most certainly. However, when you are sampling opinion, you concentrate on the mainstream and deliberately exclude the margins. No one with any professional credibility wants nutters skewing their findings.

That is broadly the case for crass ineptitude. However, and I repeat, this was not a one-off and not even with Ms Hayter.
 
By Abernathy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#560344
I don't think that the charge that the BBC Newsnight team deliberately hired an actor to praise Theresa May on air really holds water.

As for Kreuz's general concerns about the erosion of the BBC's impartiality, yes, I think it's right to be concerned. But we've had a nasty right wing government in power for 8 full years now, including the period when the BBC's charter was up for renewal. Isn't it the case that the BBC will, under this system, inevitably bow somewhat, perhaps even inadvertently, to a government agenda that focuses with a hostile eye on the corporation's very existence? Not that I'm defending such concessions, you understand.
 
By KevS
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#560370
The Red Arrow wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:09 am
To any passing admins

I wish to be known until further notice as The Reverend Arrow. Thank you.
Didn't they do a Peel Session in 1979?
  • 1
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
Meanwhile in America

I'll wager you groovers never saw this coming... […]

Caption Contest

https://i.postimg.cc/DyLpW7sH/EZpzdi3-Wk-AEB7xq.j[…]

US election 2020

The 1994 crime bill didn't look so mad at the time[…]

The Trump Presidency

Did Mexico pay for it? Much mirth in Klein thre[…]