Nothing about Britain is great. The BBC is the epitome of this, along with the illegitimately lauded NHS. Neither upholds its fundamental oath to the people. The whole system needs to be torn down.
My belief is the BBC was deliberately targeted quite some time ago for the purposes it now seems to be serving. I won't post everything I've experienced in my time for reasons of potential litigation, but I have had some close connections with 'Auntie Beeb' professionally.
It's not been an overnight affair. Dennis Potter - the celebrated playwright - loosed off some very thinly disguised rounds at John Birt back in the early 1990's about 'corporatisation' of the BBC. At the time he was diagnosed with a terminal health condition and not given long to live - so many of us put down his observations to that. I was working with The BBC when the Lowry enterprise kicked off as The BBC Northern flagship. That was an eye-opener in terms of witnessing some of the demands being made by certain execs at the time (with our money).
'Woke' culture was in evidence at the BBC way before this last few years - and I wonder what my chances would be of getting acceptance for a script, or a production signed off by the corporation nowadays as a middle-aged, white, heterosexual male? I would say - hovering somewhere close to zero (unless I had an insider 'lobbying' for me)?
The BBC was (and for many still is) a world-respected entity. Just like targeting the NHS, it's one of those 'flagship' organisations that punches a distinctly bigger-than-average 'bang for buck'. The only surprise when I learned Bill Gates was funding BBC activity, was that the amount 'donated' wasn't bigger. The R.O.I the B&MG foundation most probably gets off that donation is probably multiple times the R.O.I he ever enjoyed when running anything with anyone at Microsoft?
Equally unsurprising was Tim Davie sneering to an assembly of people that he was amazed so many people were 'still paying the licence fee'. It put me in mind of Gerald Rather and his infamous comment at a large gathering about how he managed to sell 'desirable' items so cheaply. "It's complete crap". Now, in the private sector - when you make such remarks - your share-price tanks and you get voted off the board. Not so the BBC. Just like in academia - where unless you perform a serious criminal misdemeanour - you are protected (in perpetuity) from being sacked once you reach a certain status. You are - effectively - untouchable.
This is the crux of the matter for me. Once you create an oasis of invincibility for some - the landscape is truly Orwellian. You can flood all media all day long with polls dissecting: "Should Gary Lineker lose his BBC job"? No matter if 99.9% of 'stupid licence paying drones' voted him off - would it happen? Of course not. He's untouchable. It's all part of the 'bread & circuses' illusion that many labour under the misapprehension is democracy, when even the most vaguely enlightened can clearly see the polar opposite.
The 'invincible untouchables' form the new Magna Carta. I'm increasingly of the opinion, we shut out the noise - and focus on those individuals who are effectively 'institutionally protected' from dismissal. And I use the word 'dismissal', rather than discipline. Discipline is largely hogwash in these environments presently. The risible £50 fines handed out for 'Party gate' nailed that one once and for all.
As ever - my comments aren't brief - and thanks for your patience if you've made it this far. If you want 'Nuremberg 2' - you aren't going to get it without a detailed 'Magna Carta 2023'.
Thank you Sir. I'm a British passport holder living abroad. But my impression of my home country is at best, politely described as jaded. fcUKdup the truth now. On so many fronts the nation & it's Govtards are a disgrace to the people & a complete mockery of Democracy.
There are a couple of aspects to censorship--there is the deliberate blocking of alternative inconvenient people with inconvenient views, but there is a more insidious type, mentioned by Jeffrey, the absence of reporting by their own journalists of other research so for example Prof Gupta got space on the BBC radio--but her scientific opinions were swamped by the non scientific opinions of the programmers.
Nothing about Britain is great. The BBC is the epitome of this, along with the illegitimately lauded NHS. Neither upholds its fundamental oath to the people. The whole system needs to be torn down.
My belief is the BBC was deliberately targeted quite some time ago for the purposes it now seems to be serving. I won't post everything I've experienced in my time for reasons of potential litigation, but I have had some close connections with 'Auntie Beeb' professionally.
It's not been an overnight affair. Dennis Potter - the celebrated playwright - loosed off some very thinly disguised rounds at John Birt back in the early 1990's about 'corporatisation' of the BBC. At the time he was diagnosed with a terminal health condition and not given long to live - so many of us put down his observations to that. I was working with The BBC when the Lowry enterprise kicked off as The BBC Northern flagship. That was an eye-opener in terms of witnessing some of the demands being made by certain execs at the time (with our money).
'Woke' culture was in evidence at the BBC way before this last few years - and I wonder what my chances would be of getting acceptance for a script, or a production signed off by the corporation nowadays as a middle-aged, white, heterosexual male? I would say - hovering somewhere close to zero (unless I had an insider 'lobbying' for me)?
The BBC was (and for many still is) a world-respected entity. Just like targeting the NHS, it's one of those 'flagship' organisations that punches a distinctly bigger-than-average 'bang for buck'. The only surprise when I learned Bill Gates was funding BBC activity, was that the amount 'donated' wasn't bigger. The R.O.I the B&MG foundation most probably gets off that donation is probably multiple times the R.O.I he ever enjoyed when running anything with anyone at Microsoft?
Equally unsurprising was Tim Davie sneering to an assembly of people that he was amazed so many people were 'still paying the licence fee'. It put me in mind of Gerald Rather and his infamous comment at a large gathering about how he managed to sell 'desirable' items so cheaply. "It's complete crap". Now, in the private sector - when you make such remarks - your share-price tanks and you get voted off the board. Not so the BBC. Just like in academia - where unless you perform a serious criminal misdemeanour - you are protected (in perpetuity) from being sacked once you reach a certain status. You are - effectively - untouchable.
This is the crux of the matter for me. Once you create an oasis of invincibility for some - the landscape is truly Orwellian. You can flood all media all day long with polls dissecting: "Should Gary Lineker lose his BBC job"? No matter if 99.9% of 'stupid licence paying drones' voted him off - would it happen? Of course not. He's untouchable. It's all part of the 'bread & circuses' illusion that many labour under the misapprehension is democracy, when even the most vaguely enlightened can clearly see the polar opposite.
The 'invincible untouchables' form the new Magna Carta. I'm increasingly of the opinion, we shut out the noise - and focus on those individuals who are effectively 'institutionally protected' from dismissal. And I use the word 'dismissal', rather than discipline. Discipline is largely hogwash in these environments presently. The risible £50 fines handed out for 'Party gate' nailed that one once and for all.
As ever - my comments aren't brief - and thanks for your patience if you've made it this far. If you want 'Nuremberg 2' - you aren't going to get it without a detailed 'Magna Carta 2023'.
Thank you Sir. I'm a British passport holder living abroad. But my impression of my home country is at best, politely described as jaded. fcUKdup the truth now. On so many fronts the nation & it's Govtards are a disgrace to the people & a complete mockery of Democracy.
There are a couple of aspects to censorship--there is the deliberate blocking of alternative inconvenient people with inconvenient views, but there is a more insidious type, mentioned by Jeffrey, the absence of reporting by their own journalists of other research so for example Prof Gupta got space on the BBC radio--but her scientific opinions were swamped by the non scientific opinions of the programmers.