Gender politics and BBC Sport

The Spectator has a piece this afternoon on the BBC's promotion of women's football and how it's gender politics rather than the sport that 'energises' the BBC. 

Its author, Philip Patrick, asks:

But does the BBC know its place anymore? Its purpose is surely to report the news, which means covering sport (a form of news) on the basis of the level of interest in it, not using it as a vehicle to drive societal change.

Well, we're already well into extra time on that one, Patrick. The BBC might as well update its mission statement to “inform, educate, entertain and drive societal change”.

He also argues that the BBC's coverage of women's football harms women's football by “overhyping” it and that it's  “patronising” too, in that its commentators don't do what commentators on men's football do and speak their minds and say someone played badly if they played badly. It's more a case of a continual “upbeat” patting on the head by BBC commentators on women's football matches.

Audiences will watch it, as has been shown previously. So the BBC would be better letting it speak for itself and winning what audience it wins without being so endlessly 'BBC' about it. But they won't, will they?

On which theme, it's time to quote author of The Tribe Ben Cobley again:

Nice that we're going to have some football to watch this summer: the Women's Euros kicks off on Wednesday, it's being played in England and it's all live on the BBC. 

A shame that BBC Sport's fixture list doesn't show the venues where the games are being played. 

In details like this I think you can see the decline of the Beeb: a certain slackness and lack of rigour; not doing the basics. 

They're trying to change the world instead.

P.S.

Here's an interesting angle on the Samira Ahmed/BBC/Equal pay story...

Ben Cobley: Samira Ahmed has won a case for sex discrimination in the employment tribunal despite being paid the same as her male predecessor. This is confusing. Does it mean he could appeal discrimination too, but only if he self-identifies as a woman?

Poor Ray Snoddy ploughed the Newswatch beat prior to Samira taking over. Wonder if he'll think it's worth a punt?

*******

Update: Via the 40-page written decision of the Tribunal (h/t Charlie) I see that Ray Snoddy did get mentioned.

Samira's side evidently registered the point about her (male) predecessor's pay being equal to hers and argued that she should have got more than Ray because she had broadcasting experience prior to to being given the Newswatch job while he hadn't had any broadcasting experience when he was appointed to the role, and the judge agreed.

Just look at Point 113 in the ruling.  It states that Ray Snoddy, on his appointment as the host of the BBC's Newswatch in 2014, "had no experience of presenting radio or television shows".

This confuses me because I remember Ray Snoddy very well from a Newswatch-style Channel 4 programme he presented in the 1980s (my late teens). I watched it every week.

I've just looked it up now and the programme was called Hard News. It's on his LinkedIn page. He did it for two years.

Obviously, I'd rather not get into scraps with employment tribunals over something that doesn't really concern me in the slightest, but when Employment Judge Grewal rules that Ray Snoddy "had had no broadcasting experience" before being appointed to his role at Newswatch in 2014, I'm stating - with massive confidence - that Judge Grewal is wrong.

Seriously, a sweary acronym is needed here: WTF?

And that's not even to mention Ray's regular appearances presenting What The Papers Say in its glory days - which I also remember well.

*******

As you know, this is an unfunded, free-to-view, spare time, two-person blog, but are we really the only ones reporting this story to spot that the judgment got it wrong over Samira Ahmed's predecessor as presenter of Newswatch Raymond Snoddy, with possible repercussions for her case?

At which point I'll naturally add: Or am I missing something?

Beauty before age

Here's an interesting Twitter conversation concerning the forced departure of Mark Pougatch from his presenter's role on 5 Live Sport:

Jeff Stelling (Sky): So Mark Pougatch not presenting on 5 live any more. Sad that his total professionalism will be replaced by someone who is considered to be more in touch with the youth of today, even if they know sod all about football or interviewing. He can’t say it so I will.
Ben Cobley (author) : This is the BBC in 2020. It's a disaster scene unfolding before our eyes and ears.
Alexander McCarron (freelance documentary maker): Insider observations: 1. Execs think audience are idiots, 2. They believe the young will not watch anybody/thing older than them, 3. Many are promoted through fast-track schemes, protected from failure, and 4. Social media engagement is regarded as more important than viewing figures.
Ben Cobley: A lot of it has to do with Ofcom pushing them in this direction, as I've found researching for a piece on the BBC.
Alexander McCarron: True, but all broadcasters are subject to Ofcom, yet the BBC pursue these matters so clumsily. I've had to go back and reshoot interviews, at great expense, with new contributors to make shows more diverse. Do feel free to hit me up if you need more information for you piece.
Ben Cobley: Thanks Alex, yes could come in handy. Will see.

A one-off

I read a discussion this morning on Twitter re the London Bridge terrorist attack:

Ben Cobley: I wonder how the Guardian's columnists are going to deal with this. Almost everything about it fails to fit their daily narrative. My prediction - they will focus on attacking the right for how it reacts. Also they will no doubt start ordering us to not use language that might help describe events accurately - notably linking 'Islamic' with 'terrorism' as Newsnight did last night. Anyone who does this will be accused of fomenting hate against Muslims and aiding the far right.

Dr Paul Stott: We will see what I call the pivot response to terrorism. After reporting, blandly, what has happened, they will pivot coverage to what they will really want to talk about - the right's reaction, 'Islamophobia,' Tommy Robinson etc etc

That reference to Newsnight linking 'Islamic' with 'terrorism' sounded so unlikely that I checked, and (as I should guessed) it came from Newsnight's excellent Richard Watson - probably the only BBC journalist who dares to use the phrase 'Islamic terrorism' without surrounding it with audible quotation marks:

In the last hour, the press Association has reported the suspect was known to the authorities and had connections to Islamic terrorism.