Gauguin inscribed the original French title in the upper left corner:. D'où Venons Nous / Que Sommes Nous / Où Allons Nous. The inscription the artist wrote on his canvas has no question mark, no dash, and all words are capitalized. In the upper right corner he signed and dated the painting: P. Gauguin / 1897.
Admittedly, we’re not doe-eyed Tahitian ladies, but Craig and I have been asking ourselves similar questions. We sort of know where we come from (the facetious answer is “Biased-BBC circa 2009”) but “what are we and where are we going” - with and without a question mark - are pertinent questions. Despite Brexit (or not Brexit) as the case may be.
Everyone and his dog accuses the BBC of bias. As I tried to point out in my previous post, readers who ‘clicked’ on the linky will be reminded that accusations of bias do indeed come from both sides.
People like myself believe one side (ours) represents the norm, (sanity) while t’other represents the proverbial flat-earth society and its ilk.
 |
| flat-earth society and ilk |
Nonetheless, the BBC is obliged to appear impartial and the flat-earth side of the coin is duly represented. (Convenient, too, for bolstering the institutionally not-at-all-impartial-BBC machine’s well-worn “complaints from both sides’ defence.) ”Weaponised” I think, would be the current phrase for it. The BBC has ‘weaponised’ ridiculous, feeble, ignorant and straw-man-like allegations of bias for the sleight-of-hand purpose of discrediting genuine concerns.
If the BBC *really* can’t tell the difference between half-baked assertions by juveniles and fools that the BBC is institutionally ‘right-wing’ or a ‘government mouthpiece’ and rational observations about the glaringly obvious left-wing BBC bias, which everyone and his dog politically to the right of Ash Sarkar is aware of and increasingly vociferous about, then we can simply rest our case. In other words, the reason the Beeb can’t differentiate one from the other is …..its bias, stupid!
But I don’t think this is the problem. The BBC can tell the difference, but it chooses to ignore ‘us’. It’s not so much that the BBC is run by people who are ‘literally communists’, but the people it is led and run by are stuck within a particularly incurious and settled mindset.
Anyway, as I was saying, ITBB is like the Brexit Party. There comes a time when we no longer have much of a purpose. If pointing out examples of BBC bias, as a kind of ‘campaign’, has lost impetus, that’s mainly because of its success. It's mainstream now. If "we" have helped to make ourselves redundant (but don’t let’s flatter ourselves by boasting that we had much influence over that) then we are in a way the architects of our own superfluousness.
We’ll either dwindle away or morph into something different. Whichever way the cookie crumbles, as they say on W1A, “it’s all good.”
There is a continuing and essential role for you and Craig in the future to highlight extreme PC ideology as and when it appears in the BBC output. All viewers and listeners are expected to accept without question the BBC's view of correctness. Personally I find little of interest in women's cricket, football or rugby. We are expected to help stars from these sports to become household names and 'wily fox' pundits, and celebs - for the men's game as well as their own. We have been given advance warning that same sex couples will be appearing on Strictly. We are inundated with publicity for BBC III drag acts. Drama of every sort have diversity targets in both plot and acting - no matter what the topic. The BBC are on a mission to make sure we all know how righteous and PC compliant they are. They appear to need every one of us to agree that their's is the only possible ideological path forward for the future.
ReplyDeletePlease, Sue and Craig, keep up you good work by pointing out and recording the excesses of the BBC in their socially engineered world view.
Appreciate 10 years is a long run. But its a good site, useful leads and comment. Can you hand it over rather than shut up shop. I would miss it.
ReplyDeleteJust think, if it wasn't for the BBC we would never hear about the black Muslim transwoman given the wrong coffee in Nowhere, USA.
ReplyDeleteBecause of the BBC we never hear about the EU's latest directive or treaty, (the EU having little influence on our lives, according to Nick Clegg).
That proves that the BBC is transphobic and Brexit-supporting!
It's true your job is done. For that we are very grateful! :)
ReplyDeleteExcept for Tony Hall, Lord Adonis, Momentum and the SWP, everyone now accepts that the BBC is grossly biased towards the left-liberal view of politics. It's been confirmed by numerous ex and current BBC staff like Rod Liddle, John Humphrys and Jane Glover.
I think ITBBCB should metamorphose into "Future BBC" or "Abolish the TV Tax" or similar. We now need to look to the future. You should encourage an open debate:
1. Do we retain the licence fee?
2. Do we abolish the licence fee?
3. Do we move to compulsory opt-out subscription?
4. Do we move to straightforward TV subcription?
5. Do we move to a state-subsidised broadcaster framework?
6. Do we privatise the BBC? Is so - how? In whole or break it up?
7. Do we combine some of the above options in different ways?
8. If we retain the BBC do we put in place reforms to ensure impartiality e.g. controls over senior appointments.
9. Do we put in place controls on the BBC bureaucracy e.g. limits on the number of people earning above a certain limit.
It would be good I think to have a website forum dedicated to BBC reform.
As much as the realisation that the BBC is biased has become mainstream the drive towards wokeness and intersectionism, throughout its programming, is relentless. I respect that after ten years of valiant work you might feel somewhat battle weary. Who could blame you. But you are far from redundant. If anything this blog is more relevant now than it has ever been.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to try and address these points tomorrow. Come what may, do or die (in a ditch.)
ReplyDelete