PDA

View Full Version : BBC Compromised, but we Knew That Already


mynameis
14-10-2008, 04:34 PM
Sir Terry Wogan: The BBC is no longer the best broadcaster
Sir Terry Wogan has said the BBC has lost its standing as the finest broadcasting organisation in the world.

By Anita Singh, Showbusiness Editor
Last Updated: 8:59PM BST 11 Aug 2008

The "old-fashioned thoroughness and commitment" which he encountered in his early days with the Corporation have long disappeared he said.

The Radio 2 presenter, whose career with the Corporation stretches back over 40 years, said staff no longer held a job with the BBC in high esteem.

"When I started, people who worked for the BBC knew they weren't earning as much as people in commercial television, but they did have the satisfaction of knowing that they worked for one of the finest, if not the finest, broadcasting organisation in the whole world. I'm not sure they feel that any more, or at least that it means as much as it used to," Wogan said.

Illustrating the way times have changed, Wogan recalled getting his big break in the 1960s: "When I sent in my first tape to the head of Gramophone Programmes at the BBC, I had made the fatal mistake of forgetting to rewind it to the start. Yet that gentleman took the time to wind it all the way back, and once he'd listened to it, things went from there.

"I can tell you, if I was a young chap coming over from Ireland today, they probably wouldn't even listen to my tape, let alone rewind. Somehow, that old-fashioned thoroughness and commitment have disappeared. I suppose no-one has the time for it any more."

He also lambasted modern presenters "who just read out the autocue without any of their own personality and with these awful glazed eyes, like a seagull's", although he declined to name the offenders.

In an interview with the Radio Times, Wogan also confirmed that he is stepping down as the BBC's Eurovision host after 37 years. The 70-year-old presenter has tired of the "political voting" which determines the outcome. Russia won the contest in Belgrade this year, while the UK's Andy Abrahams scraped just 14 points.

"I was considering giving up before Belgrade, and now I have to say I'm very doubtful about ever wanting to do Eurovision again. I've had so much fun, but I think it's time for someone else to take over," he said.

"Days before the show, I knew Russia would win. The fact is, Putin was getting nasty, which means the former satellite states were always going to vote for Russia in order to keep the oil coming.

"It's unfortunate, I suppose, but whereas we have always taken Eurovision with a pinch of salt, the former Eastern Bloc countries are not sufficiently versed in the ways of democracy to realise they are supposed to be voting for a song, not a next-door neighbour.

"The only way the UK will ever regain any respectability is if we get a major British star – Robbie Williams, Take That, God knows there are enough of them – to represent us, and then people will vote for us."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2541326/Sir-Terry-Wogan-The-BBC-is-no-longer-the-best-broadcaster.html



Simpson 'expects sack from BBC'

BBC world affairs editor John Simpson has said that he expects to be sacked in "horrible circumstances".

The veteran journalist, who was speaking at the Cheltenham Literary Festival, also said he felt the future of the BBC was not bright.

"I think the BBC we have known, for good or worse, is now in its last stages," said Simpson, who has worked for the BBC for 42 years.

He admitted "hating" bosses, but called the BBC a "magnificent outfit".

"Although the BBC is a difficult organisation sometimes to work for in peace and harmony... I'm very fond of it - sort of."

Wogan criticism

The broadcaster, who has visited 120 countries, said the organisation's model required money, and expressed his concern at the licence fee being "chopped away".

"The way in which our entire broadcasting system has functioned for decades since 1955 is now under very serious threat.

"It will be very different indeed. It may be better, but I somehow doubt it," said Simpson.

The 64-year-old said that his comments could get him "the boot", and pledged to remain silent if he lost his job.

"If you take someone's money, you owe them a certain debt of loyalty," added the war correspondent.

Simpson touched upon Sir Terry Wogan's recent criticisms of the BBC, saying he had said something "particularly savage".

"I thought somebody surely should have a word with him about that," he added.

The BBC said in a statement: "John Simpson, like many people, is someone who cares deeply about the BBC and its future.

"He is a hugely respected broadcaster who has made, and will continue to make, a significant contribution to the BBC."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7669442.stm

romas
14-10-2008, 05:09 PM
Heh he is right about eurovision it's a joke, people are sheep and they are still voting based on poly-ticks and old programming, Russian pop music is a joke.
Two pole thinking is great, oh USA have failed, we must all feel for Russia now!

Ian2day
14-10-2008, 05:14 PM
As Icke has mentioned the Beeb is rife with it. Of course there are those who are not aware of the goings on I expect.

lightgiver
14-10-2008, 07:42 PM
Praise and criticism

Pilger is known for his polemical style, which has attracted both praise and criticism. Harold Pinter has said of his work: "John Pilger is fearless. He unearths, with steely attention to facts, the filthy truth, and tells it as it is . . . I salute him.

Auberon Waugh, on the other hand, coined the verb "to pilger", meaning "to present information in a sensationalist manner to reach a foregone conclusion".[citation needed] In reply to this, Noam Chomsky stated that the reason why journalists have invented the terms 'to pilger' and 'pilgerise' is because, when faced with the uncomfortable facts about the consequences of U.S foreign policy that Pilger presents, "ridicule [is] the only response they are capable of".

Sydney Morning Herald columnist Gerard Henderson is one of Pilger's most vocal critics and has accused him in effect of being a conspiracy theorist.

John Simpson, the BBC's world affairs editor, has said, "A country that does not have a John Pilger in its journalism is a very feeble place indeed.

Pilger appeared as a muckraking journalist in the series Yes, Minister under the name John Pilgrim.

all the true investigative journalism in the msm is dead.

bob_jones
14-10-2008, 08:08 PM
The thing is the number of murders is on the up and the ones that care in the BBC or press are ear marked for assassination dressed up as natural causes.
If you take Paul Foot of the Guardian for example.
He was working for the In The Back Team at Private Eye and I was telling him all about Nipa Laboratories and their bribe to Tony Blair to change the law "to say" I am a psychopath.
Roger Cook also had proof and so Peter Mandleson ordered him removed from the TV screens.
So he had proof.
They had to murder him with a poisoner’s heart attack just like John Smith, Robin Cook, Slobodan Milosevic, Donald Dewar, Richard Whitley and so on.
The same reason they murdered Jill Dando (see thread):-
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20726
The BBC were effectively castrated when they were forced to apologise after Blair and Cambell ordered the murder of Dr. David Kelly and then made everyone say they are sorry.
Also the new BBC folk think they are ever so much cleverer than everyone else and the mark of intelligence to them is to be able to deceive.
Just listen to the Moral Maze on Radio 4. They are essentially making a lot of money by flogging stuff and you are not supposed to realise you are listening to an advert.
GMO and psychiatric drugs being two blatant examples of advertising camouflaged as debate on the BBC.
The method comes from psychiatry as it happens. That is where they developed the art of fraud.
They use it to describe the War On Terror and the Financial Crisis but the method is the same for psychiatrist that also think they are so much cleverer than everyone else they can deceive anyone.
The method is simple.
You falsely accuse someone of mental illness and so you are talking about something that dose no exist.
Then if two or more people enter into a discussion about all the different aspects of the illness or terror threat or financial melt down then it is very hard not to start believing in the mirage they have created.
It is the zenith of deception and it makes them feel superior to the viewers.
Going on at length about all the pros and cons and detail of a thing that only exists as an illusion in the first place.
The strategy is that if you use enough detail the viewer will become convinced that the thing they are talking about is real.
See thread:-
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38664

tylerstoast
14-10-2008, 09:14 PM
If you take Paul Foot of the Guardian for example.
He was working for the In The Back Team at Private Eye and I was telling him all about Nipa Laboratories and their bribe to Tony Blair to change the law "to say" I am a psychopath.


Are you saying you`re the victim of a plot from blair directly and personally ? or does the "I" refer to a news article type person ?