Reflecting on his guest editorship of the Today programme, Charles Moore says that though he enjoyed it and found the staff "who do the basic work" charming and helpful, he can't help feeling "a little envious of the reverential treatment accorded to Greta Thunberg when she filled the same spot".
He continues to find the BBC bureaucracy "astonishing".
He tried to get Roger Harrabin to interview two 'climate sceptics', and he tried to get Lord Hall to come on to account for "how they had got Brexit so wrong, and why they have becomes preachers for wokery", and he tried to get John Hales from BBC TVL to come on "to defend his methods of exacting the licence fee from the poor"......but, he says, "there were no takers".
It seems as if Roger Harrabin and the BBC bosses were frit.
The debate over the BBC's future must address the issue of why they appear comfortable (and complacent) whilst alienating the majority of the listening/viewing public over their Lib-left PC ideologically and politically opinionated output. The Licence-payers' traditional views are seen as something that must be broken down and destroyed. Why?
ReplyDeleteBecause our views don’t accord with theirs. It’s that simple.
DeleteThey are a dangerous organisation.
Part of the problem is that there is no real debate. The government is frightened of its power and hasn't addressed the issue or made it part of its manifesto and certainly it's not happening in the BBC. What it amounts to is the establishment thinks the BBC is a good thing / national treasure / envy of the world...blah blah...and on it trundles, pretty much left to get on with it as it wishes. By the way, where is Clementi? Has anyone seen or heard from him in recent months?
DeleteThe other part of the answer to your question I think lies in the remit it's given in The Charter. It enables the BBC to stick its nose in everywhere and allows it wide latitude to cause a lot of mischief of various kinds, according to its inclinations, without any checks or accountability other than to itself. It needs to be cut down drastically and we need a mechanism for answerability outside itself, i.e. the people who use it or who don't want to pay for it. OFCOM or the government department in charge of it are ineffective at managing it or bringing any democratic say into it.
Great sentence Anon - it absolutely nails it.
Delete‘It enables the BBC to stick its nose in everywhere and allows it wide latitude to cause a lot of mischief of various kinds, according to its inclinations, without any checks or accountability other than to itself.’
It was John Humphrys who said that the BBC can't resist the chance to do a little social engineering. But, the majority don't want to be 'engineered'. It's not great to be socially engineered - to coin a phrase.
Delete