A BBC staff walkout simply means a slight decrease in the total amount of global Marxist propaganda that gets slimed upon us today...
Posted on 01/30/2004 10:14:14 AM PST by Mark Felton
THE BBC plunged deeper into its worst crisis yesterday as thousands of staff around the country walked out in support of their deposed leaders and opinion polls showed many Britons thought the Hutton report into the death of weapons scientist David Kelly had been "a whitewash".
Some 56 per cent of voters told a Daily Telegraph poll that law lord Brian Hutton was wrong to lay all the blame on the BBC, while 49 per cent agreed in another poll that the findings were "a whitewash".
The BBC, the world's largest public broadcaster, was reeling yesterday from the report's scathing criticisms of its role in the lead-up to Kelly's suicide.
BBC staff protested at the forced resignation of the broadcaster's top executive, Greg Dyke, and staff pulled one BBC radio station off the air for a minute in protest.
Mr Dyke followed chairman Gavyn Davies out the door in the wake of Lord Hutton's criticism, leaving the organisation rudderless as it prepared for a sensitive government review of its funding, role and structure.
Both men had refused to give the kind of total apology Prime Minister Tony Blair had demanded for its handling of a May 2003 radio report by journalist Andrew Gilligan, which accused the Government of distorting intelligence to exaggerate the threat of Iraq's claimed weapons of mass destruction. Kelly was later identified as the source for Gilligan's assertion.
Mr Dyke had apologised for errors in the report but defended the BBC's right to cover the issue, noting that some aspects of the story were right. He had offered his resignation, expecting the BBC's 12-strong board of governors to reject it, but they accepted it to end the standoff with the Government.
The BBC's governors then issued a full apology, prompting Mr Blair to say he was now willing "to move on".
A defiant Mr Dyke said later he still did not accept the findings of former Northern Ireland chief justice Hutton, and did not support the board's apology.
Lord Hutton savaged the report by journalist Andrew Gilligan, and the response of his editors and the board of governors when the Government complained, saying they did not take the complaints seriously enough.
The fates of Gilligan and at least two of his editors will hinge on a new internal review by the board but union officials warned they would resist Gilligan's sacking.
Jeremy Dear of the National Union of Journalists claimed the Government was trying to intimidate the broadcaster and produce "a Pravda-style BBC" which only reported good news about the Government.
Tessa Jowell, the Secretary for Culture, Media and Sport, said Lord Hutton's findings would be considered in the coming review of the BBC charter but she promised any reforms would leave "a BBC that is nobody's lapdog - that challenges government and raises debate. That is in all our interests."
The Conservative Party said the affair proved the BBC should come under an outside regulator.
The new acting chairman, Lord Ryder, said: "The BBC must now move forward in the wake of Lord Hutton's report, which highlighted serious defects in the corporation's processes and procedures.
"On behalf of the BBC I have no hesitation in apologising unreservedly for our errors and to the individuals whose reputations were affected by them."
Mr Blair's former spin doctor, Alastair Campbell, said it was right that both men should quit.
Broadcaster Melvyn Bragg said the tears and protests of staff had shown what a huge loss Mr Dyke would be. "There have never been scenes like this in the BBC's history," he said.
The Australian
It is "privatized". Socialism is a scheme in which the assets of the many are operated by a "private" cliche of the few.
A BBC staff walkout simply means a slight decrease in the total amount of global Marxist propaganda that gets slimed upon us today...
Some people just refuse to be deprogrammed.
Shame they're not both Japanese.....
Doesn't that mean fired? Why don't they just say fired?
Not exactly...some of the tax..erm..excuse me..LICENCE FEE goes toward broadcast equipment and communications towers used by all of the broadcasters.
However, it's a tiny, tiny percentage. The vast majority of it goes to the BBC.
Their unique funding scheme (taxing television owners) allows them to do anything they want without the fear of losing "customers". This is why they have full-time Swahili translators on staff: to translate their news web pages in Swahili, 24 hours a day, so that the 100 or so Sawhili-speaking people in the UK can read the news. Talk about a waste of money!
The BBC's greatest fear is having to actually compete with commercial broadcasters. That's because they CAN'T!
Just look at some of the most popular British shows that we have copied and most of them came from the ITV television network (American Idol, Who Wants to be a Millionaire, etc.)
The BBC is mostly boring gardening and lets-remake-a-room shows. Only once in a blue moon do they actually produce a decent show (The Young Ones, Absolutely Fabulous).
What I find most interesting is that, according to that poll, the British public trusts the commercial ITV network to broadcast the truth more than they do their beloved BBC.
Even though a major item in the BBC's charter is their ban on running advertisements and product placements because of 'undue corporate influence on reporting the news'!
What I find most interesting is that, according to that poll, the British public trusts the commercial ITV network to broadcast the truth more than they do their beloved BBC.
Even though a major item in the BBC's charter is their ban on running advertisements and product placements because of 'undue corporate influence on reporting the news'!
And isn't everybody in Britain taxed like $200 a year or so per TV for the privilege of funding this garbage? What a nightmare!
Not really...the day after Clinton admitted to lying in the deposition to the American public, polls showed that more than 10% of the people still trusted him totally.
I don't believe that people honest with themselves would admit to trusting any person or institution TOTALLY except for maybe close family members.
The BBC and Clinton both prove that some factions of the public will selectively ignore facts when their beliefs are challenged.
And I do trust Fox News more so than Bush/Rove. Though I don't trust Fox News TOTALLY.
I think it's more like $150...but your point still stands.
As long as over 50% of the voting population enjoys the BBC, they will keep on making everyone pay....like it or not. Tyranny of the Majority.
Though the thought of no advertisements is enticing, my principles of freedom of choice would keep me from casting a vote for a politician that would support an American version of the BBC.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.