THROUGH THE GLASS DARKLY..
>> THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 2009
>> THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 2009
Meant to ask you if the read the BBC's shocking, yes shocking, commissioned survey of British Muslim opinion that shows three-quarter of those surveyed said it was wrong for the West to intervene militarily in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Around a third of those surveyed reckon the UK police and society to be anti-Muslim. Encouragingly, ONLY 16% oppose our forces fighting Al Queda. With a UK Muslim population of around 2.5 million, I make that around 400,000 AQ sympathisers in the UK. Wouldn't THAT make an interesting headline?
Posted by David Vance at 21:38 3 comments
Labels: anti-military, pro-Islam
UPDATE
Just to let you know that there has been a slight improvement in Geoff's condition and his chances of survival are a bit better. This is welcome news and I hope that more will follow in the days ahead. I would ask those who have offered up a little prayer for Geoff to please continue - he needs all the help possible.
Posted by David Vance at 21:31 1 comments
Labels: Geoff
FAT CATS...
I read that the astonishing salaries and expenses claims of the BBC's most senior executives are revealed for the first time today.
They show the corporations's 50 highest earning executives take home up to £13.8 million in taxpayers' money between them. The salaries of the executive board members of the publicly-funded corporation range between £310,000 and £650,000 excluding bonuses.
Should Sir Fred Goodwin apply for a job? Nice to know where your license-tax goes, isn't it? It's that "special link" that the BBC are SO keen to keep!
Posted by David Vance at 21:23 3 comments
Labels: FAT CATS
Bleep Bleep Corporation
Bleeping out, (or should I say redacting) strong language is a bit ****ing ridiculous if you ask me. Which you didn’t.
It’s not so much the ****ing gratuitous bad language that the BBC ought to be ****ing-well worried about, it’s the general decline in quality and morality.
For one thing, this token exercise merely draws unnecessary attention to something wretched, and for another.... I think that one’s ebleepingnough for now.
Will ‘toning down sex and swearing’ be enough to reverse the moral decline? No it will not.
“Viewers also expressed concern about pre-watershed programmes, including EastEnders, which often dealt with adult themes.”
Why call themes featuring self-obsessed misfits and retarded, immature, maladjusted inadequates with narcissistic personality disorders, ‘adult’?
Enough about Newsnight, as Bruce Forsythe might quip.
‘Adult’ is clearly a euphemism, a bit like ‘gay’. By all means let’s have adult themes in the old fashioned sense, i.e. for adults with a brain. And before, after and during the watershed, introduce quality, originality, wit, wisdom, entertainment, information and substance. Surely someone somewhere is capable of providing that for all the £illions we fork out.
Ann Widdecombe thinks the BBC should reduce bad language, (not bleep it out)implement the watershed, (not merely treat it as the go-ahead for violence, titillation and inanity) and NOT put stuff before (or after) 9pm that most of us do not want to see, and show families that are 'together’ instead of drug taking, broken and dysfunctional.” My words are in brackets, above.
If they do that, as far as I’m concerned, the swearing will take care of itself.
Posted by sue at 20:33 1 comments
Labels: dumbed down TV, vulgarity
NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH?
It's not JUST MP's who like to take our taxes and lavish them in entirely unsuitable directions;
The BBC is poised to provoke a fresh row over expenses by refusing to disclose how much its executives spend on entertainment for their stars. Days after MPs caused public outrage by blacking out details of their expenses, the BBC is refusing to reveal how much is spent on hospitality and gifts for its best-paid celebrities.
Ah yes, the old hospitality business. I have to be honest here and say that during all MY time in BBC studios, hospitality has not extended beyond a coffee and a sandwich! (But then again, I'm no star.) So just HOW MUCH is being spent to entertain the celeb culture with which the BBC is so pathetically infatuated?
Posted by David Vance at 07:24 39 comments
Labels: Expenses.
THE GRAND PLOT?
I wonder what you make of BBC DG Mark Thompson's suggestion that there is an ideological plot behind plans to “topslice” the television licence fee.....
In an impassioned attack on the proposals, Mark Thompson said that the Corporation was the victim of a clique of Labour policymakerswho want it to hand over £130 million a year from the levy to prop up regional news bulletins on ITV. In a surprising display of rhetorical aggression, the BBC’s boss said that they were “ideologically focused” on attacking the Corporation’s funding structure.
Well, I have to say that I take an ideological position on the BBC license tax. I think that it is outdated, inappropriate and unfair. In the 21st century we do not need a State broadcaster as currently manifest by the BBC and it's not a question of "top-slicing" it, it is question of AXING it? Oh, and it's not the BBC which is the victim of a clique of Labour policymakers - it is the people of the United Kingdom.
Posts
