For the uninitiated, bourach is a Scots word which means a right old mess, which I think is a fair term to describe what's been going on at the BBC. However, I'm not so sure it deserves quite as much opprobrium as is being currently heaped upon it.
Ok, the Newsnight team screwed up, big time and exruciatingly, not once but twice. They had plenty evidence about one active paedophile the BBC employed and they didn't broadcast it. They left it to another channel, ITV, to break the Jimmy Savile story almost a year later. Newsnight got a pasting for it and there are many issues around Jimmy Savile the BBC has still to account for. So, when they had an interview making allegations about an unnamed senior Tory carrying out abuse, they really wouldn't have wanted to repeat that error. What they failed to do, sadly, was the most basic of due diligence. Showing Steve Messham a picture of Lord McAlpine could have saved a lot of bother. There was definite incompetence there, but it is far from being the most egregious action on the part of a media organisation that we've seen recently.
I was really sad to see former Director General George Entwistle tender his inevitable resignation last night. It may have been inevitable, but only because the rest of the media, owned by powerful corporations who don't like our high quality public service broadcaster or the public funds it receives, would have kept kicking him until he did.
I have a huge amount of sympathy for Entwistle, much more than I have (none) for James Murdoch who, correct me if I'm wrong, still has a job despite seemingly knowing nothing that was going on in the organisation he was responsible for. And don't get me started on Jeremy Hunt.
Newsnight may have been stupid, but that's nothing compared to the brazen irresponsibility of Philip Schofield the other day. Ambushing the Prime Minister in the way he did on live TV, handing over a card with names of people who were the subject of gossip on the internet, was completely unacceptable. I am actually willing to forgive him this one monumental muck up and don't want to see his successful broadcasting career ended because of it, but I want to know that he's learned his lesson. I want an apology from him for more than the names on that card being visible. Treating internet gossip as a reliable news source is just wrong.
What worries me most is that those who were guilty of the abuse - and there is no doubt that abuse took place - might get away with it because they've been given a bit of a smokescreen.The main issue here is that vulnerable children were harmed while in the care of the state and have not been listened to when they tried to report that harm. The appropriate authorities need to get to the root of what happened there and make amends to the victims.
BBC news is not what it used to be, that's certainly true. We could see that from the US election coverage the other night when it took the BBC far too long to report the results. I ended up watching CNN instead. However, you only have to look at Fox News to see how lucky we are to have the BBC. Auntie may sometimes be a bit late with the news, but at least what you get is reasonably impartial and accurate.
There may well have been a bourach in Shepherd's Bush, but we have to be wise to the political motivations of those who are throwing the most muck at the BBC. The broadcaster itself will have to make sure that it's proportionate in the action it takes. If they end up putting loads of resources into breathing down the neck of every single journalist, it's going to take funding away from the other excellent quality programming they produce across drama, sport, children's stuff, documentaries, entertainment and music.
Showing posts with label BBC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BBC. Show all posts
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Friday, October 12, 2012
Jimmy Savile: Going on news to say you had a notion of what was going on is not clever
With every revelation about Jimmy Savile, there are more questions about how on earth he managed to get away with what appears to be a sustained campaign of abuse for so long.
I am finding it particularly annoying that people are popping up all over the news, nodding sagely and saying, yes, they'd heard rumours about what was happening 40 years ago and some even have information about specific instances of abuse.
Well, all I have to say is why on earth did you not say anything about it then? Why did people simply sit around in the pub or wherever gossiping about this stuff? In what universe is sexual abuse of children an appropriate topic for idle chitchat?
Those who didn't really know but chewed the fat over the rumours in the pub are one thing, but those who did know, or had a pretty good idea what was going on and did nothing about them, even when the girls made complaints.
I hope they don't think going on the news now is helpful in any way. It's certainly not endearing to hear somebody say that they had an idea of what was going on and did nothing about it.They need to be questioning their own motives and actions and should be ashamed to show their faces.
The tragedy is that it's so difficult to get convictions for these offences. It's bad enough now, but nobody took allegations seriously 40 years ago and treated those making them with disdain at best. There were people surrounding Savile, who must have each had bits of the jigsaw, who could have put a stop to it and made sure he ended up in jail where he belonged.
Of course, if they had come forward, they would still have come up against a libel-averse press and a Police Force who didn't care much for these sorts of things, a world run by men for men even more than it is today. But enough people seem to have known enough to have taken this beyond random allegation towards unassailable case.
There aren't, of course, any severe enough words to deal with a parent whose daughter tells them they've been subjected to abuse and they tell her off. You can bet your life that if my daughter said anything like that to me, she'd be listened to, believed and her concerns would be taken forward by the appropriate authorities, making sure every procedure to make it less traumatic for her was followed.
I am far from impressed with the BBC's role in this. It is no secret that the media (and performing arts for that matter) is a pretty sexist and misogynistic environment to work in. That's why women are put out to grass the minute they show signs of aging but men get to stick around until they decide to retire. That's why there's a casting couch. Liz Kershaw's account of being sexually assaulted while she was live on air does not indicate a culture where females are seen as anything like equal. There was clearly some sort of cover up within its ranks. When they had a choice between protecting a sleazeball star or vulnerable young girls, it was clear, given that sort of culture, who was going to win through. Anyone who perpetuated that sort of culture similarly should be ashamed of themselves.
The BBC haven't learned that much if they could so easily bin the Newsnight story compiled as recently as last year. There is a pretty detailed report about what Savile is alleged to have done, who may have known and how widespread it was in last week's Sunday Times (£). There is much to make decent people wince in that article, but I was particularly disgusted at how Karin Ward, who was featured in the ITV documentary, had been treated recently by the BBC. Not only had she had to talk about that abuse on screen for nothing, but when the current story broke, look what some insensitive BBC idiot did:
The truth has come out far too late to ensure that anyone who did wrong back then faces the appropriate consequences. The girls Savile abused have had a life sentence. Anyone who worked with Savile in the last 40 years and who had an incling of what was going on and did nothing should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
I am finding it particularly annoying that people are popping up all over the news, nodding sagely and saying, yes, they'd heard rumours about what was happening 40 years ago and some even have information about specific instances of abuse.
Well, all I have to say is why on earth did you not say anything about it then? Why did people simply sit around in the pub or wherever gossiping about this stuff? In what universe is sexual abuse of children an appropriate topic for idle chitchat?
Those who didn't really know but chewed the fat over the rumours in the pub are one thing, but those who did know, or had a pretty good idea what was going on and did nothing about them, even when the girls made complaints.
I hope they don't think going on the news now is helpful in any way. It's certainly not endearing to hear somebody say that they had an idea of what was going on and did nothing about it.They need to be questioning their own motives and actions and should be ashamed to show their faces.
The tragedy is that it's so difficult to get convictions for these offences. It's bad enough now, but nobody took allegations seriously 40 years ago and treated those making them with disdain at best. There were people surrounding Savile, who must have each had bits of the jigsaw, who could have put a stop to it and made sure he ended up in jail where he belonged.
Of course, if they had come forward, they would still have come up against a libel-averse press and a Police Force who didn't care much for these sorts of things, a world run by men for men even more than it is today. But enough people seem to have known enough to have taken this beyond random allegation towards unassailable case.
There aren't, of course, any severe enough words to deal with a parent whose daughter tells them they've been subjected to abuse and they tell her off. You can bet your life that if my daughter said anything like that to me, she'd be listened to, believed and her concerns would be taken forward by the appropriate authorities, making sure every procedure to make it less traumatic for her was followed.
I am far from impressed with the BBC's role in this. It is no secret that the media (and performing arts for that matter) is a pretty sexist and misogynistic environment to work in. That's why women are put out to grass the minute they show signs of aging but men get to stick around until they decide to retire. That's why there's a casting couch. Liz Kershaw's account of being sexually assaulted while she was live on air does not indicate a culture where females are seen as anything like equal. There was clearly some sort of cover up within its ranks. When they had a choice between protecting a sleazeball star or vulnerable young girls, it was clear, given that sort of culture, who was going to win through. Anyone who perpetuated that sort of culture similarly should be ashamed of themselves.
The BBC haven't learned that much if they could so easily bin the Newsnight story compiled as recently as last year. There is a pretty detailed report about what Savile is alleged to have done, who may have known and how widespread it was in last week's Sunday Times (£). There is much to make decent people wince in that article, but I was particularly disgusted at how Karin Ward, who was featured in the ITV documentary, had been treated recently by the BBC. Not only had she had to talk about that abuse on screen for nothing, but when the current story broke, look what some insensitive BBC idiot did:
Ward says that, despite everything, the BBC contacted her again last Sunday asking for her help. “On Sunday evening, when the Savile story broke, the BBC contacted me and asked if I’d like to take part in their radio phone-in show,” she said.
“I was so incensed by their insensitivity. They obviously hadn’t taken any account of how difficult it is to speak about abuse on camera, to waive your anonymity and have that thrown back in your face, feel like you’ve been kicked in the teeth, and then to contact me like that, out of the blue, wanting to know something about it because everyone else was talking about it . . . I sent them a scathing reply saying ‘Absolutely not, I don’t want anything to do with you.
The truth has come out far too late to ensure that anyone who did wrong back then faces the appropriate consequences. The girls Savile abused have had a life sentence. Anyone who worked with Savile in the last 40 years and who had an incling of what was going on and did nothing should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
Monday, March 05, 2012
My first ever live tv interview.........
This is the story of how I found myself staring at this at around 12:45 yesterday:
I was sitting at my sister's dining room table on Thursday afternoon writing my cosy blog post about the weekend ahead when my phone rang. It was the BBC Sunday Politics office wanting to know if I'd appear on the programme on Sunday. I assumed they meant from Inverness, but they wanted me in Glasgow. That was never going to be possible. I miss Malcolm Bruce's speeches for no-one, not to mention Willie Rennie and the topical motion on a two question ballot paper. Thankfully, though, after a bit of checking, they decided that I could do it "down the line" from Eden Court theatre.
For those of you who haven't done this, "down the line" means standing there looking into a camera, with an earpiece and a microphone, ready to have a conversation with someone you can't see. I just decided that I'd treat it like I was talking on the phone. I certainly do enough of that.
Now, I write for a reason. Normally when I'm confronted with a camera, I get a bit like a deer caught in the headlights. I think of a bit of video encouragement I did for Jo Swinson's marathon fundraising last year, or a shockingly bad experience with a BBC camera 4 years ago when I was asked to explain why I supported Nick Clegg and made an absolute horlicks of it.
You can tell as the interview progresses that I relaxed more and more into it and became more sure of what I was saying. I think the difference was having a few days to think about it and having that wee while to get "into the zone" in front of the camera. It's not like I was put on the spot and had to think really quickly what to say.
The first question was basically "Is Nick Clegg forgiven?" I'm glad I managed not to fall into that trap. I kind of fell over my words a few times, but I'm in good company on that one. I hope I got across the very positive mood of the Conference and the different strands of our recovery, the development of ideas as evidenced by Robert Brown's new book, the fabulous next generation of people like Sophie Bridger, Kris Chapman, Eilidh Dickson, Alex White, Kavya Kaushik and David Green from Liberal Youth Scotland and the fact that new and talented people are joining us again. As well as that, we have the fabulous record of our councillors to showcase over next few months.
To my eternal shame, I actually used that cheesy phrase "Liberal Democrats campaign all year round". Oh dear. What will it be next? You know that Willie Rennie, he has a record of action, a promise of more? That Jim Hume, he's a worker, a winner. Dear, dear.
I could do with keeping a bit stiller and at one point when I wasn't being spoken to, I scratched my nose, not realising I was visible to the world on the big screen behind Isabel Fraser. It was quite a weird set up as it was more two interviews being conducted at the same time - me from Inverness and Ian Smart in the studio. I don't see how they could have done it any differently, though. I certainly hadn't been paying any attention to goings on at the Labour Conference so couldn't comment on that.
I wish the BBC would let you embed these things, but the link to the programme, from pretty much the right place in the programme, is here if you want to see my moment of fame for yourself. In the end I quite enjoyed it and would do it again despite the inherent scariness.
I've also appreciated some good feedback from people, including The Burd, who said I lit up the screen. That was lovely.
I was sitting at my sister's dining room table on Thursday afternoon writing my cosy blog post about the weekend ahead when my phone rang. It was the BBC Sunday Politics office wanting to know if I'd appear on the programme on Sunday. I assumed they meant from Inverness, but they wanted me in Glasgow. That was never going to be possible. I miss Malcolm Bruce's speeches for no-one, not to mention Willie Rennie and the topical motion on a two question ballot paper. Thankfully, though, after a bit of checking, they decided that I could do it "down the line" from Eden Court theatre.
For those of you who haven't done this, "down the line" means standing there looking into a camera, with an earpiece and a microphone, ready to have a conversation with someone you can't see. I just decided that I'd treat it like I was talking on the phone. I certainly do enough of that.
Now, I write for a reason. Normally when I'm confronted with a camera, I get a bit like a deer caught in the headlights. I think of a bit of video encouragement I did for Jo Swinson's marathon fundraising last year, or a shockingly bad experience with a BBC camera 4 years ago when I was asked to explain why I supported Nick Clegg and made an absolute horlicks of it.
You can tell as the interview progresses that I relaxed more and more into it and became more sure of what I was saying. I think the difference was having a few days to think about it and having that wee while to get "into the zone" in front of the camera. It's not like I was put on the spot and had to think really quickly what to say.
The first question was basically "Is Nick Clegg forgiven?" I'm glad I managed not to fall into that trap. I kind of fell over my words a few times, but I'm in good company on that one. I hope I got across the very positive mood of the Conference and the different strands of our recovery, the development of ideas as evidenced by Robert Brown's new book, the fabulous next generation of people like Sophie Bridger, Kris Chapman, Eilidh Dickson, Alex White, Kavya Kaushik and David Green from Liberal Youth Scotland and the fact that new and talented people are joining us again. As well as that, we have the fabulous record of our councillors to showcase over next few months.
To my eternal shame, I actually used that cheesy phrase "Liberal Democrats campaign all year round". Oh dear. What will it be next? You know that Willie Rennie, he has a record of action, a promise of more? That Jim Hume, he's a worker, a winner. Dear, dear.
I could do with keeping a bit stiller and at one point when I wasn't being spoken to, I scratched my nose, not realising I was visible to the world on the big screen behind Isabel Fraser. It was quite a weird set up as it was more two interviews being conducted at the same time - me from Inverness and Ian Smart in the studio. I don't see how they could have done it any differently, though. I certainly hadn't been paying any attention to goings on at the Labour Conference so couldn't comment on that.
I wish the BBC would let you embed these things, but the link to the programme, from pretty much the right place in the programme, is here if you want to see my moment of fame for yourself. In the end I quite enjoyed it and would do it again despite the inherent scariness.
I've also appreciated some good feedback from people, including The Burd, who said I lit up the screen. That was lovely.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
BBC misogyny is so 2011
You would expect, wouldn't you, that a public service broadcaster with a deserved reputation for quality as the BBC has, would be very careful to make sure that it didn't discriminate against any one group of people.
Unfortunately not. This year, the Corporation has fired off one insult after another at women and seems to be enjoying it.
The Corporation is more than happy to put together all or mostly male panels to discuss the issues of the day. Question Time is the biggest offender, but other current affairs programmes are as bad. How often have I watched Politics Scotland and not seen one female voice on it?
And what does it matter? Well, actually it does. Take, for example, the offensive and appalling way in which Chairman of the Scottish Affairs Select Committee Ian Davidson treated SNP MP Eilidh Whiteford. I'd say that the women across parties that I spoke to were almost all on Eilidh Whiteford's side, as I was. The boys, however, were allowed to brush it all off as inconsequential.
I wrote earlier this year about my complaint to the Corporation over the way its reporters spoke about Miriam Gonzalez Durantez during our Conference this year. More than three months on and after a follow up, no response has been received.
To add insult to injury, the shortlist for BBC Sports Personality of the Year was 100% male, cos women just don't do sport do they? I mean, I don't even know that much about sport and I managed to suggest a good few names. Our own Jo Swinson, along with some other MPs, protested and the BBC was sniffy in its response. Apparently allowing a virtually all male cast of newspaper sports editors, along with lads' mags such as Nuts and Zoo is fine by them.
And then yesterday, not having learned anything, BBC Magazine publishes its faces of 2011 - the women. They couldn't even think of an actual woman for December, so they picked Edinburgh Zoo's new panda Tian Tian, or Sweetie. Now, heaven knows I love that panda. She is gorgeous and I'm looking forward to seeing her snuggly little face again next week. Her place in that list, though, is completely inappropriate. I accept the list is women who have made the news rather than achieved highly, but even so, being human should be a pre-requisite.
Why pick the panda when in December you could have had Mona Eltahawy, the fearless and feisty journalist who's been reporting on Egypt's troubles for much of the year. At the end of November, she was beaten and sexually assaulted by the security forces there, an experience she wrote movingly and angrily about in the Guardian. The Times' Caitlin Moran, who recently won the Galaxy Book of the Year for her brilliant How to be a Woman, could also have featured there.
In October, rather than pick a Spanish Duchess who got married, why not choose one of the Nobel Peace Prize winners, Tawakul Karman, who has put herself at great risk to champion the cause of women's rights in Yemen?
And why no mention for Elisabeth Sladen, the actress who played the character so many girls of my generation wanted to be: Sarah Jane Smith in Doctor Who?
You would also think that Angela Merkel would figure somewhere in that list. She is, after all, one of the key leaders in the Eurozone.
I was, however, pleased to see Gabrielle Giffords in the BBC's list. The Arizona Congresswoman's remarkable recovery after taking a bullet through the brain has been one of the most inspirational stories of the year. Sarah Burton, too, for designing Kate Middleton's wedding dress, showcased the Alexander MacQueen label to perfection and deserves her place.
But there's no place for either woman who wrote the stories behind two of the biggest films of the year, the final instalment of the Harry Potter series and Breaking Dawn Part 1.
Nor our excellent sporting champions like gymnast Tweddle, swimmer Rebecca Adlington or triathlete Chrissie Wellington.
But why does all this even matter anyway?
Sure, we have relatively decent rights for women in this country, but there are those who would limit maternity leave and employment protection given half a chance. We see from around the world what happens when we're not vigilant in advancing the feminist cause. Many of us were shocked to see Egyptian security forces viciously beat a female protestor the other week in footage. Well, that was nothing compared to what, according to yesterday's New York Times, they had in store for some for other women. It's pretty obvious that these women's rights were violated - but we need to get to the stage where the violations don't happen in the first place.
But that's Egypt, not even a democracy. Nothing to do with us. Let's have a look at the USA then. This is a place where women are arrested for murdering their babies if they miscarry. And there seems to be even more pandering to the religious right than usual in the race to be the Republican Presidential candidate as Digby's Hullabaloo wrote yesterday. It made me feel a bit queasy to see a report in the Daily Fail about a young girl who chose not to have chemotherapy when she was pregnant and who died when her baby was a few days old. These are heartbreaking choices, but it worries me that women who make the other choice risk disapproval and public censure. The pressure on women in the Bible Belt of the USA in that circumstance must be immense and I wouldn't like to think that women were pressured into choosing certain death for themselves.
We need to be talking much more openly about things like the effect of the free availability of internet porn on the behaviour of young men and their expectations from a sexual relationship. The potential for the sexual and violent abuse of young girls is clear.
Many girls and women spend too much time obsessing over their size and shape because a misogynist, male dominated media implies that finding a life partner is all that matters, and you have no chance of doing that if you don't conform to what they say is beautiful.
It's about time women were given their rightful, equal place in BBC coverage. Their misogyny is so last year. Let's hope that 2012 is the year when they start to wake up to the realities of life.
Unfortunately not. This year, the Corporation has fired off one insult after another at women and seems to be enjoying it.
The Corporation is more than happy to put together all or mostly male panels to discuss the issues of the day. Question Time is the biggest offender, but other current affairs programmes are as bad. How often have I watched Politics Scotland and not seen one female voice on it?
And what does it matter? Well, actually it does. Take, for example, the offensive and appalling way in which Chairman of the Scottish Affairs Select Committee Ian Davidson treated SNP MP Eilidh Whiteford. I'd say that the women across parties that I spoke to were almost all on Eilidh Whiteford's side, as I was. The boys, however, were allowed to brush it all off as inconsequential.
I wrote earlier this year about my complaint to the Corporation over the way its reporters spoke about Miriam Gonzalez Durantez during our Conference this year. More than three months on and after a follow up, no response has been received.
To add insult to injury, the shortlist for BBC Sports Personality of the Year was 100% male, cos women just don't do sport do they? I mean, I don't even know that much about sport and I managed to suggest a good few names. Our own Jo Swinson, along with some other MPs, protested and the BBC was sniffy in its response. Apparently allowing a virtually all male cast of newspaper sports editors, along with lads' mags such as Nuts and Zoo is fine by them.
And then yesterday, not having learned anything, BBC Magazine publishes its faces of 2011 - the women. They couldn't even think of an actual woman for December, so they picked Edinburgh Zoo's new panda Tian Tian, or Sweetie. Now, heaven knows I love that panda. She is gorgeous and I'm looking forward to seeing her snuggly little face again next week. Her place in that list, though, is completely inappropriate. I accept the list is women who have made the news rather than achieved highly, but even so, being human should be a pre-requisite.
Why pick the panda when in December you could have had Mona Eltahawy, the fearless and feisty journalist who's been reporting on Egypt's troubles for much of the year. At the end of November, she was beaten and sexually assaulted by the security forces there, an experience she wrote movingly and angrily about in the Guardian. The Times' Caitlin Moran, who recently won the Galaxy Book of the Year for her brilliant How to be a Woman, could also have featured there.
In October, rather than pick a Spanish Duchess who got married, why not choose one of the Nobel Peace Prize winners, Tawakul Karman, who has put herself at great risk to champion the cause of women's rights in Yemen?
And why no mention for Elisabeth Sladen, the actress who played the character so many girls of my generation wanted to be: Sarah Jane Smith in Doctor Who?
You would also think that Angela Merkel would figure somewhere in that list. She is, after all, one of the key leaders in the Eurozone.
I was, however, pleased to see Gabrielle Giffords in the BBC's list. The Arizona Congresswoman's remarkable recovery after taking a bullet through the brain has been one of the most inspirational stories of the year. Sarah Burton, too, for designing Kate Middleton's wedding dress, showcased the Alexander MacQueen label to perfection and deserves her place.
But there's no place for either woman who wrote the stories behind two of the biggest films of the year, the final instalment of the Harry Potter series and Breaking Dawn Part 1.
Nor our excellent sporting champions like gymnast Tweddle, swimmer Rebecca Adlington or triathlete Chrissie Wellington.
But why does all this even matter anyway?
Sure, we have relatively decent rights for women in this country, but there are those who would limit maternity leave and employment protection given half a chance. We see from around the world what happens when we're not vigilant in advancing the feminist cause. Many of us were shocked to see Egyptian security forces viciously beat a female protestor the other week in footage. Well, that was nothing compared to what, according to yesterday's New York Times, they had in store for some for other women. It's pretty obvious that these women's rights were violated - but we need to get to the stage where the violations don't happen in the first place.
But that's Egypt, not even a democracy. Nothing to do with us. Let's have a look at the USA then. This is a place where women are arrested for murdering their babies if they miscarry. And there seems to be even more pandering to the religious right than usual in the race to be the Republican Presidential candidate as Digby's Hullabaloo wrote yesterday. It made me feel a bit queasy to see a report in the Daily Fail about a young girl who chose not to have chemotherapy when she was pregnant and who died when her baby was a few days old. These are heartbreaking choices, but it worries me that women who make the other choice risk disapproval and public censure. The pressure on women in the Bible Belt of the USA in that circumstance must be immense and I wouldn't like to think that women were pressured into choosing certain death for themselves.
We need to be talking much more openly about things like the effect of the free availability of internet porn on the behaviour of young men and their expectations from a sexual relationship. The potential for the sexual and violent abuse of young girls is clear.
Many girls and women spend too much time obsessing over their size and shape because a misogynist, male dominated media implies that finding a life partner is all that matters, and you have no chance of doing that if you don't conform to what they say is beautiful.
It's about time women were given their rightful, equal place in BBC coverage. Their misogyny is so last year. Let's hope that 2012 is the year when they start to wake up to the realities of life.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Caron's Moonlightings: Jo Swinson MP questions BBC on all male Sports Personality Shortlist
You might recall I wasn't best pleased yesterday when I'd seen the shortlist for the BBC's Sports Personality of the Year award because it had not one single woman on it. At the same time as writing it, I fired off an e-mail to Jo Swinson MP. She told me that she and other MPs were planning to take it up with the BBC.
They sent a letter to BBC Director General Mark Thompson earlier today. I wrote up all the details over at Lib Dem Voice.
By the way, they are going to be slipping me the keys to Liberal Democrat Voice Towers every Wednesday in December. The perfect time of year to steal Mark Pack's chocolate..... Don't tell him that's my plan, though.
I've had a couple of days as Guest Editor before - in April I did a Grand Tour of Elections, Referendums and Liberal Democrat Achievements and the previous October we had a day of optimism and hope. So, I want to bring a bit of seasonal warmth and snuggles and fun to the Voice. Do you have any thoughts on what you'd like me to cover in between the devouring of the chocolate?
They sent a letter to BBC Director General Mark Thompson earlier today. I wrote up all the details over at Lib Dem Voice.
By the way, they are going to be slipping me the keys to Liberal Democrat Voice Towers every Wednesday in December. The perfect time of year to steal Mark Pack's chocolate..... Don't tell him that's my plan, though.
I've had a couple of days as Guest Editor before - in April I did a Grand Tour of Elections, Referendums and Liberal Democrat Achievements and the previous October we had a day of optimism and hope. So, I want to bring a bit of seasonal warmth and snuggles and fun to the Voice. Do you have any thoughts on what you'd like me to cover in between the devouring of the chocolate?
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Don't boycott male only panels - complain about them
The Burd has posted about continuing, ignominious gender fail at the BBC. The culprit this time is Newsnight Scotland, affectionately tagged #newsnicht on Twitter - again. Female panellists are as rare as hens' teeth on that programme, a source of great annoyance to me, as you can imagine. To be honest, though, I hardly ever watch it - it's on way past my bedtime.
I tend to get equally irate about Question Time, which hardly ever has a balanced panel, politically or in terms of gender. Politics Scotland is also a persistent offender. I've seen shows, like yesterday's, where all the interviewees from Westminster, as well as the pundits, were male.
I was quite stupefied by one of the comments on The Burd's piece which suggested that the BBC overall made quite a lot of programmes aimed at women. So, we're supposed to watch Masterchef and EastEnders while the boys talk about the issues of the day, are we? It's the 18th century, without the corsets, thankfully, all over again.
Kate (the Burd's real name) also mentioned a letter to the Guardian by a group of eminent women announcing that they would boycott events which had all male panels. I get why but I think a retreat from the scene of the crime is in this instance counterproductive. We need to make more noise, not less. We need to encourage audience members of panel programmes like Question Time to embarrass the BBC by making reference to the stupidity of a virtually all male panel - in a calm way, I'm not talking about stage invasions or anything like that, but the point needs to be made, publicly.
At non televised events, I think it's also worth asking the men on the panel if they are not embarrassed to be taking part in something where there are no women. Put them on the spot. Get people to sign letters of complaint to the organisers.
And the rest of us - every single time we see an unbalanced panel, we should complain. I usually say something on Twitter if I notice it - but we need to complain to the relevant organisations and be systematic about it. Here's the BBC complaint form - something I now have in my favourites.
Writing this has reminded me that they haven't replied to the complaint I made about the way the BBC News Channel treated Miriam Gonzalez Durantez during the Autumn Liberal Democrat Conference, so I've sent them a reminder this morning.
I think that all male panels are off-putting to women and often lead them to conclude that politics isn't for them because it's not about them. When political parties put up banks of men in suits at a photo opp, it makes me seethe. My lot are just as culpable as anybody else and they hear from me when they get it wrong, you can be assured on that. I remember getting annoyed last year at some footage from a bit of razz at SNP conference when there wasn't one single woman on the stage.
Women's bodies are often airbrushed in photographs, but we're also in danger of allowing ourselves to be airbrushed out of discussions on the governance of the country. We need to find some way of ridiculing those who allow that to happen, to make them feel uncomfortable about it. A boycott is way too silent for that.
I tend to get equally irate about Question Time, which hardly ever has a balanced panel, politically or in terms of gender. Politics Scotland is also a persistent offender. I've seen shows, like yesterday's, where all the interviewees from Westminster, as well as the pundits, were male.
I was quite stupefied by one of the comments on The Burd's piece which suggested that the BBC overall made quite a lot of programmes aimed at women. So, we're supposed to watch Masterchef and EastEnders while the boys talk about the issues of the day, are we? It's the 18th century, without the corsets, thankfully, all over again.
Kate (the Burd's real name) also mentioned a letter to the Guardian by a group of eminent women announcing that they would boycott events which had all male panels. I get why but I think a retreat from the scene of the crime is in this instance counterproductive. We need to make more noise, not less. We need to encourage audience members of panel programmes like Question Time to embarrass the BBC by making reference to the stupidity of a virtually all male panel - in a calm way, I'm not talking about stage invasions or anything like that, but the point needs to be made, publicly.
At non televised events, I think it's also worth asking the men on the panel if they are not embarrassed to be taking part in something where there are no women. Put them on the spot. Get people to sign letters of complaint to the organisers.
And the rest of us - every single time we see an unbalanced panel, we should complain. I usually say something on Twitter if I notice it - but we need to complain to the relevant organisations and be systematic about it. Here's the BBC complaint form - something I now have in my favourites.
Writing this has reminded me that they haven't replied to the complaint I made about the way the BBC News Channel treated Miriam Gonzalez Durantez during the Autumn Liberal Democrat Conference, so I've sent them a reminder this morning.
I think that all male panels are off-putting to women and often lead them to conclude that politics isn't for them because it's not about them. When political parties put up banks of men in suits at a photo opp, it makes me seethe. My lot are just as culpable as anybody else and they hear from me when they get it wrong, you can be assured on that. I remember getting annoyed last year at some footage from a bit of razz at SNP conference when there wasn't one single woman on the stage.
Women's bodies are often airbrushed in photographs, but we're also in danger of allowing ourselves to be airbrushed out of discussions on the governance of the country. We need to find some way of ridiculing those who allow that to happen, to make them feel uncomfortable about it. A boycott is way too silent for that.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
My complaint to the BBC about Miriam Gonzalez Durantez
When I say about, I obviously don't mean about anything Miriam has done, but the way in which the news channels of our usually high quality public service broadcaster treat her. Don't get me wrong, they are nowhere near as horrendous as the Daily Fail, but I expect better from the BBC.
I wrote on Saturday how annoyed I was about the way reporter Norman Smith referred to her, but the straw that broke this camel's back was the comment by the News Channel's reporter on Nick's speech yesterday afternoon who felt the need to tell us all that Miriam had gone home on Sunday and only come back for Nick's speech yesterday lunchtime.
Well, what a scandal that someone should have their own job to go to. Most of us don't spend much time hanging round our spouse's place of work, funnily enough. Was she supposed to be on his arm at every appearance looking up at him with puppy dog eyes, for goodness sake?
I've basically asked them to call her by her name, not Miriam Clegg, without any asides like "as she likes to be known" and to run any comments they make about her through a 21st century filter.
I'll let you know what they say.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
"Miriam Clegg is a force to be reckoned with" #ldconf
I couldn't let that comment, or the context in which it was made, go.
The BBC's new replacement for Laura Kuenssberg, who is kicking Robert Peston's backside over at ITN now, is Norman Smith. Yesterday, I was very disappointed to see him get into this "Miriam is a harridan who keeps Nick Clegg very firmly under her thumb" narrative.
It's all to do with this piece of nonsense in the Daily Fail - a biography by Jasper Gerard which seems to be little more than tittle tattle and wild speculation. It is alleged that Miriam has put her foot down about Nick doing another term as Deputy Prime Minister. I can't imagine anyone's even started to think about what happens after the next election for a start.
So, Norman Smith, talking about this book on camera yesterday, saying that Team Clegg had dismissed it as rubbish, said "Miriam Clegg is a force to be reckoned with." With a bit of added eyebrow raising. What? For a start he could have actually got her name right. Her name is Miriam Gonzalez Durantez. In Spain people don't change their names when they get married. I took the time to go and find out his name. Until about 10 minutes ago, he was Norman Thingy as far as I was concerned.
It sounded like one of those blokey cosy comments. You know, when you're at a party, as I was last night, and the girls are drinking mojitos in the kitchen and the boys are drinking beer outside - and when a girl ventures out, the conversation goes dead. How we mocked, by the way.
Except Norman Smith wasn't out on the decking drinking beer, he was broadcasting to an audience of men and women. It'd be nice if he remembered that in future.
What sort of ridiculous world to we live in when a politician's wife is expected, in this day and age, to be meek and passive? We saw what happened to Hillary when Bill was in the White House and sighed - and that was 20 years ago. And when expressing an opinion on anything other than knitting or cookie recipes is seen as undue, insidious, interference.
If Nick Clegg is such a passive character, why on earth is 75% of the Liberal Democrat manifesto being implemented and why do we see such a stream of Tories whinging about all the things we are stopping them doing?
And every time Miriam opens her mouth, she earns more respect from women outside the Daily Mail's fantasy world where women are seen and not heard.
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
The BBC, Fairer Votes and Reform
Reform.
What's that all about?
Well, a quick google gives this as a dictionary definition.
The BBC high heed yins have apparently issued guidance barring its presenters from using the word "reform" in this context. Even if you don't agree with it, that organisation calls any sort of Government proposal for change "reform" so not to do so is inconsistent.
To me, it's the BBC being timid. This is an example of the BBC risking their impartiality by being too cautious, pandering to the No to AV campaign, which is made up of powerful people trying to protect their vested interests.
The Yes to Fairer Votes people are writing to the BBC Director General to complain. When I signed up on Monday afternoon, only around 2,800 people had signed. Now it's nearly 13,000.
If you haven't already, why don't you sign up and let's see if we can get to 15,000 by the end of the day.
*Post updated to make clear that the person elected under AV secures a majority of the votes cast. Under the current system, for example such as in Oldham East and Saddleworth in May 2010, the MP was elected on a mere 31% of the votes cast.
What's that all about?
Well, a quick google gives this as a dictionary definition.
re·form (rBy any standards, changing the voting system so that MPs have to work harder to win the trust of half of their voters* is a change for the better, and deserves to be called a reform.-fôrm
)v. re·formed, re·form·ing, re·formsv.tr.
1. To improve by alteration, correction of error, or removal of defects; put into a better form or condition.
2.a. To abolish abuse or malpractice in: reform the government.b. To put an end to (a wrong). See Synonyms at correct.
3. To cause (a person) to give up harmful or immoral practices; persuade to adopt a better way of life.
v.intr.
To change for the better.
n.
1. A change for the better; an improvement.
2. Correction of evils, abuses, or errors.
3. Action to improve social or economic conditions without radical or revolutionary change.
The BBC high heed yins have apparently issued guidance barring its presenters from using the word "reform" in this context. Even if you don't agree with it, that organisation calls any sort of Government proposal for change "reform" so not to do so is inconsistent.
To me, it's the BBC being timid. This is an example of the BBC risking their impartiality by being too cautious, pandering to the No to AV campaign, which is made up of powerful people trying to protect their vested interests.
The Yes to Fairer Votes people are writing to the BBC Director General to complain. When I signed up on Monday afternoon, only around 2,800 people had signed. Now it's nearly 13,000.
If you haven't already, why don't you sign up and let's see if we can get to 15,000 by the end of the day.
*Post updated to make clear that the person elected under AV secures a majority of the votes cast. Under the current system, for example such as in Oldham East and Saddleworth in May 2010, the MP was elected on a mere 31% of the votes cast.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Three reasons the BBC News annoyed me last night
After a relaxing day yesterday, I settled down to watch the 10 o'clock news. Now it was going to take something amazingly special to live up to the previous programme, which ended up with Robbie Williams singing Angels, but there were three things about the news bulletins that really got up my nose in a big way.
Firstly, they are giving a lot of unchallenged time of day to Trade Union dinosaurs who are threatening us all with "class warfare" - their words, not mine.
Before they even see the result of a Comprehensive Spending Review, the unions are asking for a mandate for co-ordinated nationwide industrial action.
They seem to forget that Labour were planning £44 billion of cuts that they hadn't identified because of the financial mess the country was in.
Why are no journalists asking these dinosaurs to identify exactly how much money they were able to save us in the spending cuts of the 80s? They just added to the misery by dragging people out on ineffective, costly strike action, costing even more jobs.
Secondly, the aircraft carriers story has been rumbling on all weekend. As I said yesterday, it's ironic to see an SNP First Minister who wouldn't be building any aircraft carriers in an independent Scotland, and Labour, whose dithering and delaying showed a nonchalance to them when in office. Nobody seems to make these points to them.
And, thirdly, the headline about the F1 could have been "Jenson Button finishes second in the Italian Grand Prix and gets back into the championship race" but, no, it was all about Lewis Hamilton's first lap crash, with only the scantest mention of Jenson's achievement.
A bit of balance would not go amiss from the BBC.
Firstly, they are giving a lot of unchallenged time of day to Trade Union dinosaurs who are threatening us all with "class warfare" - their words, not mine.
Before they even see the result of a Comprehensive Spending Review, the unions are asking for a mandate for co-ordinated nationwide industrial action.
They seem to forget that Labour were planning £44 billion of cuts that they hadn't identified because of the financial mess the country was in.
Why are no journalists asking these dinosaurs to identify exactly how much money they were able to save us in the spending cuts of the 80s? They just added to the misery by dragging people out on ineffective, costly strike action, costing even more jobs.
Secondly, the aircraft carriers story has been rumbling on all weekend. As I said yesterday, it's ironic to see an SNP First Minister who wouldn't be building any aircraft carriers in an independent Scotland, and Labour, whose dithering and delaying showed a nonchalance to them when in office. Nobody seems to make these points to them.
And, thirdly, the headline about the F1 could have been "Jenson Button finishes second in the Italian Grand Prix and gets back into the championship race" but, no, it was all about Lewis Hamilton's first lap crash, with only the scantest mention of Jenson's achievement.
A bit of balance would not go amiss from the BBC.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Question Time Fail Deja Vu - Nigel Farage on AGAIN and no Lib Dem #bbcqt
I bring you news, dear readers, of yet another monstrous Question Time fail. My keyboard has become a wall against which I bang my head.
Two weeks in a row with no Lib Dem and, for the fifth time in 17 months, we have to listen to Nigel Farage, the former leader of UKIP again as his Twitter feed confirms.
I haven't updated the spreadsheet I didn't create in February for my Question Time Geeks Special edition in February but I think that I should.
There is definitely a correlation to us being missed off in weeks where we are most relevant and have most to say and have a unique contribution to the likely debates - I suspect Nick's performance yesterday at PMQs will be picked over for a start.
As I wrote in February:
It will be the third time we've had the dubious pleasure of Nigel Farage's dulcet tones. In fact, he was also on last February - the week with all the snow - with Shami and Will Young. Four times in just over a year, for the leader of the swivel eyed fringe? Someone at the Beeb is surely having a laugh. That's not counting the week Kilroy was on and the other UKIP person just before the European elections.
Seven times in one year for the right wing swivel eyed fringe as well as Nick Griffin? Heavily over-represented, I'd say.
I am cross.
Two weeks in a row with no Lib Dem and, for the fifth time in 17 months, we have to listen to Nigel Farage, the former leader of UKIP again as his Twitter feed confirms.
I haven't updated the spreadsheet I didn't create in February for my Question Time Geeks Special edition in February but I think that I should.
There is definitely a correlation to us being missed off in weeks where we are most relevant and have most to say and have a unique contribution to the likely debates - I suspect Nick's performance yesterday at PMQs will be picked over for a start.
As I wrote in February:
It will be the third time we've had the dubious pleasure of Nigel Farage's dulcet tones. In fact, he was also on last February - the week with all the snow - with Shami and Will Young. Four times in just over a year, for the leader of the swivel eyed fringe? Someone at the Beeb is surely having a laugh. That's not counting the week Kilroy was on and the other UKIP person just before the European elections.
Seven times in one year for the right wing swivel eyed fringe as well as Nick Griffin? Heavily over-represented, I'd say.
I am cross.
Friday, July 16, 2010
A(nother) BBC Question Time Double Fail
Now that it's the school holidays, I've had the chance to stay up to join in the BBC Question Time tweetfest on a Thursday night cos I don't have to get up early.
You'll know that I've had my say on the lack of Liberal Democrats on the Question Time panel - even going so far as to have a geeks' special analysis at one point.
Last night was a spectacular fail in the variety of opinion on the panel. Basically we had two current Labour people, one ex Labour MP, a Tory cabinet minister and Nick Ferrari who almost makes the likes of Kelvin Mackenzie look liberal. So, 3 from a Labour/left point of view and 2 from the Tories/lunatic right wing tabloid fringe. Liberalism is a philosophy all on its own, nearly a quarter of people voted for it in May and deserves representation.
However, it's not that imbalance that made me most angry last night. I was surprised that nobody really paid much attention to the fact that the panel was 80% male. It's not an uncommon occurrence, either. The only woman was Sally Bercow and Twitter seemed to be very exercised that she was only there because of who her husband was. Maybe - although she is on of the Labour leading lights on Twitter in her own right.
Having said that, she talked more sense than the entire rest of the panel put together. Unusually for Labour people who aren't trying to sell books, she didn't seem to have swallowed a pint of vinegar and taken a bile pill before the show. She talked about how she favoured free speech and didn't think the vile Raoul Moat Facebook group should be taken down however much she disagreed with it. She sounded like a proper human being. I enjoy her tweets and would definitely recommend following her.
Question Time was bad enough but I gave up on BBC This Week - Ed Balls, Abi Titmuss and Kelvin Mackenzie is too much pain for a publicly funded organisation to inflict on anybody in one dose.
You'll know that I've had my say on the lack of Liberal Democrats on the Question Time panel - even going so far as to have a geeks' special analysis at one point.
Last night was a spectacular fail in the variety of opinion on the panel. Basically we had two current Labour people, one ex Labour MP, a Tory cabinet minister and Nick Ferrari who almost makes the likes of Kelvin Mackenzie look liberal. So, 3 from a Labour/left point of view and 2 from the Tories/lunatic right wing tabloid fringe. Liberalism is a philosophy all on its own, nearly a quarter of people voted for it in May and deserves representation.
However, it's not that imbalance that made me most angry last night. I was surprised that nobody really paid much attention to the fact that the panel was 80% male. It's not an uncommon occurrence, either. The only woman was Sally Bercow and Twitter seemed to be very exercised that she was only there because of who her husband was. Maybe - although she is on of the Labour leading lights on Twitter in her own right.
Having said that, she talked more sense than the entire rest of the panel put together. Unusually for Labour people who aren't trying to sell books, she didn't seem to have swallowed a pint of vinegar and taken a bile pill before the show. She talked about how she favoured free speech and didn't think the vile Raoul Moat Facebook group should be taken down however much she disagreed with it. She sounded like a proper human being. I enjoy her tweets and would definitely recommend following her.
Question Time was bad enough but I gave up on BBC This Week - Ed Balls, Abi Titmuss and Kelvin Mackenzie is too much pain for a publicly funded organisation to inflict on anybody in one dose.
Friday, July 02, 2010
BBC wrongly hype AV Referendum as test of Coalition
I had a small hissy fit while watching the news last night when I heard BBC political correspondent James Landale describe how the proposed referendum on changing the voting system for Westminster elections to the Alternative Vote was a key test for the Coalition and how it was the one reason we'd joined forces with the Tories.
Well, I have news for James Landale. AV is not any sort of glittering prize. All it does is make sure that the MP in each seat is elected by a majority of the people. It does not make the system proportional across the country. At best, it's marginally better than First Past the Post, a tiny baby step to the reform we actually need. At worst, it's a distraction, a dead end, on the road to reform. In a post in which I outlined many good things in the Coalition Agreement, the AV referendum ended up in the "bring me the gin now" section. I wrote at the time:
I doubt you'd find many Liberal Democrats willing to die in a ditch for such a small change which won't necessarily make the voting system fairer. Yes, I'll vote for AV in the referendum, I suppose, although I'm more tempted by the idea of an STV write in campaign. My enthusiasm for it could be described at most as tepid.
James Landale needs to realise that the reason we went into this coalition was because the country needed a stable Government which would tackle the horrific mess Labour had left with the least possible impact on the poorest and would go the distance. Yes, we could have let the Tories govern as a minority and voted with a Labour Party that's even more irresponsible in opposition than it is in Government, but there would have been two disastrous outcomes from that: our economy would have been well stuffed, and a Conservative minority government, fed up at being able to accomplish nothing, would have gone to the country within months and possibly secured a massive majority. If that had happened, we could kiss goodbye to raising of the tax threshold, a pay rise for the lowest paid public sector workers, possibly had the range of VAT extended to things like children's clothes and books, had no levy on the banks or commitment to banking reform, an end to dangerous shorter prison sentences, no Calman reforms for Scotland and so on.
It was the right and the responsible thing to do for the Liberal Democrats to enter this coalition, but please don't think for one minute we did it because we thought we could get the Alternative Vote system.
Well, I have news for James Landale. AV is not any sort of glittering prize. All it does is make sure that the MP in each seat is elected by a majority of the people. It does not make the system proportional across the country. At best, it's marginally better than First Past the Post, a tiny baby step to the reform we actually need. At worst, it's a distraction, a dead end, on the road to reform. In a post in which I outlined many good things in the Coalition Agreement, the AV referendum ended up in the "bring me the gin now" section. I wrote at the time:
Now, I know we could, some might say should, have held out for STV and gone into opposition if we couldn't get it. I have a whole load of sympathy with that argument. I would actually ditch the referendum on AV - it's a waste of money. Is AV worth us actually campaigning for? I wouldn't be bothered if this referendum never saw the light of day and we shouldn't have agreed to it.
I doubt you'd find many Liberal Democrats willing to die in a ditch for such a small change which won't necessarily make the voting system fairer. Yes, I'll vote for AV in the referendum, I suppose, although I'm more tempted by the idea of an STV write in campaign. My enthusiasm for it could be described at most as tepid.
James Landale needs to realise that the reason we went into this coalition was because the country needed a stable Government which would tackle the horrific mess Labour had left with the least possible impact on the poorest and would go the distance. Yes, we could have let the Tories govern as a minority and voted with a Labour Party that's even more irresponsible in opposition than it is in Government, but there would have been two disastrous outcomes from that: our economy would have been well stuffed, and a Conservative minority government, fed up at being able to accomplish nothing, would have gone to the country within months and possibly secured a massive majority. If that had happened, we could kiss goodbye to raising of the tax threshold, a pay rise for the lowest paid public sector workers, possibly had the range of VAT extended to things like children's clothes and books, had no levy on the banks or commitment to banking reform, an end to dangerous shorter prison sentences, no Calman reforms for Scotland and so on.
It was the right and the responsible thing to do for the Liberal Democrats to enter this coalition, but please don't think for one minute we did it because we thought we could get the Alternative Vote system.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Of Snow and Cack-handed Coups
Only in Britain, or, maybe, as Stephen corrected me earlier, only in England could you have a half hour news special at prime time on the weather conditions and not one on an attempt to unseat the Prime Minister. Ok, so that attempt was as ill advised cackhanded as the weather is disruptive, but still. You might like to read Eric Joyce, Labour MP for Falkirk West's view of today's events. It will be interesting to eventually discover, no doubt in someone's memoirs, what really went down today. Who pledged support to the plotters and then pulled the rug from under them?
Anyway, back to the snow, which merited a news special which seemed to be crafted entirely for the TV column of Private Eye. They even got together a whole load of people in a pub for the occasion. What's really funny is that we in Scotland have had several inches of snow for the last three weeks but only when the white stuff hits the home counties is it newsworthy. I despair.
As I've said before, I'm pretty much phobic about the stuff. Today is Day 21 for us and I've been out of my house 3 times. Once to go to the shops in the car, once to go to my neighbour's 2 doors down and finally to go to my neighbour's 3 doors down in the other direction for their Hogmanay Party. The neighbour who had the party fell and broke her wrist on the street which hasn't made me any more confident about venturing out.
So, we've had a minimum of four inches of snow for the last 3 weeks. At the moment there's over a foot on the rabbit run. (in case you're wondering, rabbits are under several hutch covers, have lots of snow and get checked regularly and their bottle is changed every couple of hours whether it's frozen or not) every day, somebody gets stuck trying to get their car in and out of our street. It's a testament to the wonderful community spirit here that there's always been someone with a shovel to help dig them out.
I have to say that I have nothing but sympathy for anyone in a Council who's having to manage their Winter services, especially when there seems to be a problem getting grit to the right places, as has been the case in Fife. A lot of effort has been made by many people to keep the gritters going 24/7. Of course there are going to be problems, or mistakes, but this is the worst and most prolonged spell of weather I've seen in all of my life so my instinct is to say "give em a break" rather than slag them off.
Our street has never been gritted - it's nowhere near anywhere the Council would do on a good day when they had limitless supplies of grit and equipment. I get that it's really important that they keep the main roads clear. I found this BBC site a useful education on road gritting, stating that it has to be done often on the main roads to keep them clear which, I guess, doesn't leave much time for anywhere else.
Of course, there's always one example of insensitive and tactless comment, as reported in today's Evening News. Edinburgh City Cllr Norman Work thinks that it's pure laziness that we're not all out there with shovels clearing our own paths and streets. Well, Cllr Work, you try getting out there and see how far you get with a shovel on compacted snow and ice. I accept that it's a difficult job for Councils to manage, but I don't think dismissing local residents as lazy is in any way helpful or constructive.
There are also those who say, and often they're those who are normally in favour of cutting public services, who are shouting loud and long about Councils' failures, accusing them of criminal irresponsibility for not gritting their street. I'd ask them how much more Council Tax they would be willing to pay, or what services they would cut, to buy in equipment which would probably be needed once every couple of decades? In countries where they know they are going to get a lot of snow every year, they deal with it, but because we get it so rarely, we are bound to have problems. These extremities come once or twice in a career so there's not a whole load of opportunity to build up experience.
It may well be that this snow is actually a sign of more permanent climate change, with the mild gulf stream being displaced by cruel weather systems from the north, so we might have to learn to cope better. If that's the case, we'll have to take lessons from the likes of Canada and Scandinavia where the snow tyres come out in November and go away in March.
I think that we do need to pull together in these extreme conditions and do whatever we can to help others - and also to be tolerant of the Councils who are doing their best to keep as many roads as safe as they can. Of course they are going to make mistakes, and when it's all over, these need to be investigated and lessons learned and written down for the future.
Travelling anywhere is pretty hellish at the moment, by vehicle or on foot. I'm lucky that I've managed to avoid it. I seriously don't know how I'd cope if I didn't have a husband to trudge up to the shops, or friends to take Anna to and from school (although she's off this week as our schools don't go back until next week). I have to say that one good effect of the weather for us was that we were significantly less greedy than usual over the Festive Season, given that our consumption was confined to what Bob could carry from the supermarket. The poor man spent 2 hours on the local station until a train turned up to take him to work and may have had to do the same today had a colleague not decided to take his 4x4 into town.
They may have come across one of those Council mistakes on the way. Immediately after Junction 2 of the M8 which leads to Newbridge, the traffic slowed up and the motorway was down to one lane because it didn't appear to have been gritted. The ony place traffic could go was in the outside lane so the usual bottleneck there was intensified. I'm wondering if this is to do with the fact that that area is somewhat in no man's land between Edinburgh and West Lothian Councils and nobody had actually taken responsibility for it. However that occurred, let's hope they get it sorted.
The people I worry about most in all of this are those who really struggle to pay their fuel bills at the best of times. There's nothing worse than being cold and I am scared for people in that situation. Being too cold can be dangerous and can cost lives. I guess our energies should also be focused on making sure people in that situation get the help that they need. It's awful that the Government doesn't give Winter fuel payments to disabled people, or families with disabled children who really struggle to keep warm. Maybe the harshness of this Winter will force a rethink on that one.
So, much more important things to think about all round, not that you'd tell from the actions of a few plotting Blairites and a BBC News Special that didn't really scratch the surface.
Anyway, back to the snow, which merited a news special which seemed to be crafted entirely for the TV column of Private Eye. They even got together a whole load of people in a pub for the occasion. What's really funny is that we in Scotland have had several inches of snow for the last three weeks but only when the white stuff hits the home counties is it newsworthy. I despair.
As I've said before, I'm pretty much phobic about the stuff. Today is Day 21 for us and I've been out of my house 3 times. Once to go to the shops in the car, once to go to my neighbour's 2 doors down and finally to go to my neighbour's 3 doors down in the other direction for their Hogmanay Party. The neighbour who had the party fell and broke her wrist on the street which hasn't made me any more confident about venturing out.
So, we've had a minimum of four inches of snow for the last 3 weeks. At the moment there's over a foot on the rabbit run. (in case you're wondering, rabbits are under several hutch covers, have lots of snow and get checked regularly and their bottle is changed every couple of hours whether it's frozen or not) every day, somebody gets stuck trying to get their car in and out of our street. It's a testament to the wonderful community spirit here that there's always been someone with a shovel to help dig them out.
I have to say that I have nothing but sympathy for anyone in a Council who's having to manage their Winter services, especially when there seems to be a problem getting grit to the right places, as has been the case in Fife. A lot of effort has been made by many people to keep the gritters going 24/7. Of course there are going to be problems, or mistakes, but this is the worst and most prolonged spell of weather I've seen in all of my life so my instinct is to say "give em a break" rather than slag them off.
Our street has never been gritted - it's nowhere near anywhere the Council would do on a good day when they had limitless supplies of grit and equipment. I get that it's really important that they keep the main roads clear. I found this BBC site a useful education on road gritting, stating that it has to be done often on the main roads to keep them clear which, I guess, doesn't leave much time for anywhere else.
Of course, there's always one example of insensitive and tactless comment, as reported in today's Evening News. Edinburgh City Cllr Norman Work thinks that it's pure laziness that we're not all out there with shovels clearing our own paths and streets. Well, Cllr Work, you try getting out there and see how far you get with a shovel on compacted snow and ice. I accept that it's a difficult job for Councils to manage, but I don't think dismissing local residents as lazy is in any way helpful or constructive.
There are also those who say, and often they're those who are normally in favour of cutting public services, who are shouting loud and long about Councils' failures, accusing them of criminal irresponsibility for not gritting their street. I'd ask them how much more Council Tax they would be willing to pay, or what services they would cut, to buy in equipment which would probably be needed once every couple of decades? In countries where they know they are going to get a lot of snow every year, they deal with it, but because we get it so rarely, we are bound to have problems. These extremities come once or twice in a career so there's not a whole load of opportunity to build up experience.
It may well be that this snow is actually a sign of more permanent climate change, with the mild gulf stream being displaced by cruel weather systems from the north, so we might have to learn to cope better. If that's the case, we'll have to take lessons from the likes of Canada and Scandinavia where the snow tyres come out in November and go away in March.
I think that we do need to pull together in these extreme conditions and do whatever we can to help others - and also to be tolerant of the Councils who are doing their best to keep as many roads as safe as they can. Of course they are going to make mistakes, and when it's all over, these need to be investigated and lessons learned and written down for the future.
Travelling anywhere is pretty hellish at the moment, by vehicle or on foot. I'm lucky that I've managed to avoid it. I seriously don't know how I'd cope if I didn't have a husband to trudge up to the shops, or friends to take Anna to and from school (although she's off this week as our schools don't go back until next week). I have to say that one good effect of the weather for us was that we were significantly less greedy than usual over the Festive Season, given that our consumption was confined to what Bob could carry from the supermarket. The poor man spent 2 hours on the local station until a train turned up to take him to work and may have had to do the same today had a colleague not decided to take his 4x4 into town.
They may have come across one of those Council mistakes on the way. Immediately after Junction 2 of the M8 which leads to Newbridge, the traffic slowed up and the motorway was down to one lane because it didn't appear to have been gritted. The ony place traffic could go was in the outside lane so the usual bottleneck there was intensified. I'm wondering if this is to do with the fact that that area is somewhat in no man's land between Edinburgh and West Lothian Councils and nobody had actually taken responsibility for it. However that occurred, let's hope they get it sorted.
The people I worry about most in all of this are those who really struggle to pay their fuel bills at the best of times. There's nothing worse than being cold and I am scared for people in that situation. Being too cold can be dangerous and can cost lives. I guess our energies should also be focused on making sure people in that situation get the help that they need. It's awful that the Government doesn't give Winter fuel payments to disabled people, or families with disabled children who really struggle to keep warm. Maybe the harshness of this Winter will force a rethink on that one.
So, much more important things to think about all round, not that you'd tell from the actions of a few plotting Blairites and a BBC News Special that didn't really scratch the surface.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Auntie's moral compass flushed down the toilet as BBC asks "Should gays be executed?"
Well, I thought I was unshockable.
Until this lunchtime.
Until I came across this.
I really hope that by the time you read this that link has been taken down because someone has seen sense and realised how utterly objectionable it is.
I am speechless (and that takes a lot) that a corporation with a reputation for being the best public service broadcaster in the world has seen fit to host a discussion entitled "Should homosexuals be executed?".
I can't believe that they think that this is a legitimate question for discussion and, what's particularly worrying is that the fact that it might lend credibility to the harbingers of hate who are trying to introduce the appallingly bigoted legislation in Uganda.
Andrew wrote passionately the other day about why this legislation is just so wrong.
For the BBC to promote discussion on this topic could be seen as inciting hatred. If they'd put "should black people be executed?" it would have rightly have been against the law so why do they think that they can get away with this?
If you are as outraged as I am, please complain to the BBC here.
UPDATE: The ink was barely dry on this post when the BBC finally seems to have realised it may have dropped a big one. They have changed the header to "Should Uganda debate gay execution?" which isn't really much better. I mean, you can't really answer yes to that question without infringing their rules of posting which are:
"We reserve the right to reject messages which:
* Are racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable"
They've also closed this particular debate down which I guess is progress.
Until this lunchtime.
Until I came across this.
I really hope that by the time you read this that link has been taken down because someone has seen sense and realised how utterly objectionable it is.
I am speechless (and that takes a lot) that a corporation with a reputation for being the best public service broadcaster in the world has seen fit to host a discussion entitled "Should homosexuals be executed?".
I can't believe that they think that this is a legitimate question for discussion and, what's particularly worrying is that the fact that it might lend credibility to the harbingers of hate who are trying to introduce the appallingly bigoted legislation in Uganda.
Andrew wrote passionately the other day about why this legislation is just so wrong.
For the BBC to promote discussion on this topic could be seen as inciting hatred. If they'd put "should black people be executed?" it would have rightly have been against the law so why do they think that they can get away with this?
If you are as outraged as I am, please complain to the BBC here.
UPDATE: The ink was barely dry on this post when the BBC finally seems to have realised it may have dropped a big one. They have changed the header to "Should Uganda debate gay execution?" which isn't really much better. I mean, you can't really answer yes to that question without infringing their rules of posting which are:
"We reserve the right to reject messages which:
* Are racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable"
They've also closed this particular debate down which I guess is progress.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Jo Swinson dropped from BBC Question Time Panel
Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs shadow minister Jo Swinson commented on Twitter this morning that she was a
"bit miffed at being dropped from #bbcqt panel at 48hrs notice: Iraq inquiry this week and no Lib Dem on panel!"
I may be wrong, but I have a vague recollection that this might not be the first time this has happened to her, either.
What is reprehensible on the part of the BBC is that it is choosing to run its main current affairs discussion programme without a Liberal Democrat on the week that the Iraq Inquiry starts. The Liberal Democrats were the only UK wide party to oppose the war from the very start so it's clear that we have a unique perspective on a question that's bound to come up.
Not only that, but this is also the week that the Government puts out its response to the Calman Commission report. Again the BBC are allowing the debate on Scotland's future to be represented as a simplistic choice between traditional unionism and independence when we offer a dynamic, fresh Federal perspective.
This is the second week in four that there has been no Liberal Democrat in the panel which in itself is cause for complaint. And talking of complaint, click here to tell the BBC that you want this decision reversed and for Jo to be on the panel tomorrow night.
UPDATE: There's now a group on new Lib Dem social network Act. Please join both.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Panorama shows plight of Afghan Women
Last night I settled down to watch Panorama, knowing that I'd find it absolutely horrendous to see its depiction of the terrible repression in Afghanistan.
Reporter Jane Corbin had been to Afghanistan and had interviewed women who had suffered terrible brutality, who showed incredible bravery in speaking out about their ordeals. My 10 year old daughter came in to the room just as 17 year old Saida was explaining how she'd been married off at the age of 9, sold by her brothers to a 60 year old man who beat her and forced her into prostitution. It took her 7 years to excape this vile creature. Anna was quite shocked by the contrast between her carefree life, reflecting on the fun we'd had altogether at a fruit picking farm, where the most taxing thing she had to do was help her daddy find a way through the maze, and the lives of these young girls her age thousands of miles away.
Then there was Zeinab, who had set herself alight after years of beatings from her husband and who saw no alternative but to return to him after she recovered.
We heard that despite the law, the majority of marriages are forced, that 80% of women face domestic violence, and, not at all coincidentally, the same proportion is illiterate, yet in this climate of oppression, courageous and inspiring women look to the future. There's the lawyer, Maria, who has armed guards outside her house after the Taleban tried to blow her up to stop her working. There's Maryam, driven out of her village after winning second prize in the Afghan version of Dragon's Den and who plans to use her winnings to build a factory and employ women - which she can only do if their husbands consent but which will show women that there's another way to live where they can have a say in their own destiny. There's the young MP, frustrated at the Government's failure to make progress on women's rights.
I was particularly moved by the 13 year old girl who was determined to continue her education and become a doctor. When asked what would happen if she was forced into marriage, she said that her husband would just have to let her continue her studies. I hope her idealism is not in vain and she gets the chance to do that.
Depressingly, there was also the only woman remaining in President Hamid Karzai's cabinet. She looked resigned and almost uncomfortable as she spouted the Party line -that cultural change doesn't happen overnight and could take decades. I suspect it'll take a good bit longer than that if men can get away with beating and raping their wives, never having to fear prosecution because they'll likely be able to bribe their way out of it. Presumably the Minister's willingness to comply was the reason she was the sole woman in office.
We also heard that President Karzai's wife is herself a doctor, who could show an example to other women - remember these powerful images of Mousavi's wife in Iran and how that turned the election - but who is not allowed by her husband to appear in public.
I think what made me most uncomfortable, though, was the fact that they were showing the footage of women's situation to the mother of a soldier who died there. At the end, Jane Corbin asked her more than once whether she thought her son had died in vain given the treatment of women in Afghanistan. It looked like they were pushing her to say that he had, which I felt was a bit insensitive and unfair.
I think what the programme showed was that the Afghan Government, despite having the benefit of thousands of international forces to help them, is only able to pay lip service to the laws guaranteeing equality and fairness to all. It's surely time for President Obama and Gordon Brown to put more pressure on whoever the President is after the elections to put its words into actions and stop the terrible abuses faced by most Afghan women.
Reporter Jane Corbin had been to Afghanistan and had interviewed women who had suffered terrible brutality, who showed incredible bravery in speaking out about their ordeals. My 10 year old daughter came in to the room just as 17 year old Saida was explaining how she'd been married off at the age of 9, sold by her brothers to a 60 year old man who beat her and forced her into prostitution. It took her 7 years to excape this vile creature. Anna was quite shocked by the contrast between her carefree life, reflecting on the fun we'd had altogether at a fruit picking farm, where the most taxing thing she had to do was help her daddy find a way through the maze, and the lives of these young girls her age thousands of miles away.
Then there was Zeinab, who had set herself alight after years of beatings from her husband and who saw no alternative but to return to him after she recovered.
We heard that despite the law, the majority of marriages are forced, that 80% of women face domestic violence, and, not at all coincidentally, the same proportion is illiterate, yet in this climate of oppression, courageous and inspiring women look to the future. There's the lawyer, Maria, who has armed guards outside her house after the Taleban tried to blow her up to stop her working. There's Maryam, driven out of her village after winning second prize in the Afghan version of Dragon's Den and who plans to use her winnings to build a factory and employ women - which she can only do if their husbands consent but which will show women that there's another way to live where they can have a say in their own destiny. There's the young MP, frustrated at the Government's failure to make progress on women's rights.
I was particularly moved by the 13 year old girl who was determined to continue her education and become a doctor. When asked what would happen if she was forced into marriage, she said that her husband would just have to let her continue her studies. I hope her idealism is not in vain and she gets the chance to do that.
Depressingly, there was also the only woman remaining in President Hamid Karzai's cabinet. She looked resigned and almost uncomfortable as she spouted the Party line -that cultural change doesn't happen overnight and could take decades. I suspect it'll take a good bit longer than that if men can get away with beating and raping their wives, never having to fear prosecution because they'll likely be able to bribe their way out of it. Presumably the Minister's willingness to comply was the reason she was the sole woman in office.
We also heard that President Karzai's wife is herself a doctor, who could show an example to other women - remember these powerful images of Mousavi's wife in Iran and how that turned the election - but who is not allowed by her husband to appear in public.
I think what made me most uncomfortable, though, was the fact that they were showing the footage of women's situation to the mother of a soldier who died there. At the end, Jane Corbin asked her more than once whether she thought her son had died in vain given the treatment of women in Afghanistan. It looked like they were pushing her to say that he had, which I felt was a bit insensitive and unfair.
I think what the programme showed was that the Afghan Government, despite having the benefit of thousands of international forces to help them, is only able to pay lip service to the laws guaranteeing equality and fairness to all. It's surely time for President Obama and Gordon Brown to put more pressure on whoever the President is after the elections to put its words into actions and stop the terrible abuses faced by most Afghan women.
Friday, May 22, 2009
What would make the BBC Formula One Coverage perfect
Regular readers will know how much I love the BBC Formula One Coverage. I think with its combination of no ads, bitching, banter and Brundle it is the best sports reporting team ever.
Its website is pretty darned good as well with a regular video blog from Murray Walker, as much background information as you could ever wish for and, at the moment, video highlights of five classic Monaco races, from Stirling Moss winning in a little bug like thing in 1961 to the thrilling event in 1996 when Olivier Panis eventually won after numerous changes of lead.
There's one thing missing though - a Twitter feed. The BBC has numerous Twitter feeds from everything to jazz to football to good food and lots of regional radio and tv stations have them too. There are some vaguely related feeds. Thanks to Duncan for pointing me in the direction of @5liveF1 and @LeeMck but neither were active during and around practice yesterday. In fact, if you wanted to communicate with the commentators (who were fabulous by the way, including one who was held up giving her report because she was "kissing Roger". The subsequent revelation that Roger turned out to be Mark Webber's fitness trainer just added to the sense of jealousy at not being there.), you had to resort to texting. I mean, how old fashioned is that?
So, let's have a Twitter feed where you tell us what's coming up and the Twitterverse sends you its observations and questions. If finding someone to do it is a problem, I'd be happy to volunteer........
LibDig This!
Its website is pretty darned good as well with a regular video blog from Murray Walker, as much background information as you could ever wish for and, at the moment, video highlights of five classic Monaco races, from Stirling Moss winning in a little bug like thing in 1961 to the thrilling event in 1996 when Olivier Panis eventually won after numerous changes of lead.
There's one thing missing though - a Twitter feed. The BBC has numerous Twitter feeds from everything to jazz to football to good food and lots of regional radio and tv stations have them too. There are some vaguely related feeds. Thanks to Duncan for pointing me in the direction of @5liveF1 and @LeeMck but neither were active during and around practice yesterday. In fact, if you wanted to communicate with the commentators (who were fabulous by the way, including one who was held up giving her report because she was "kissing Roger". The subsequent revelation that Roger turned out to be Mark Webber's fitness trainer just added to the sense of jealousy at not being there.), you had to resort to texting. I mean, how old fashioned is that?
So, let's have a Twitter feed where you tell us what's coming up and the Twitterverse sends you its observations and questions. If finding someone to do it is a problem, I'd be happy to volunteer........
LibDig This!
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Tony Benn takes on BBC for refusing to screen DEC Gaza Appeal
Those lily livered craven Daily Mail obsessed thick heads at the BBC have refused to show the Disaster Emergency Committee's Gaza appeal for some very bizarre reasons. They say the aid might not get through - whose fault is that, Israel?
They infer that the money we give might end up gong to Hamas. What? Don't they trust the DEC? These aren't a bunch of leftie students, you know, they are credible charities, ranging from TEARFund to Save the Children, to Help the Aged to Oxfam and the British Red Cross.
BBC Director General Mark Thomson came up with the unbelievable "Inevitably an appeal would use pictures which are the same or similar to those we would be using in our news programmes but would do so with the objective of encouraging public donations. The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story."
I don't think it's ever stopped them from doubting either the credibility or the efficacy of DEC before.
Here's hoping that the BBC's disgraceful stance does for this necessary humanitarian effort what Mike Read's equally bizarre decision to ban did for Frankie Goes to Hollywood's Relax - makes it one of the biggest successes.
Good for Tony Benn, too, for taking the BBC News Channel interviewer to task:
LibDig This!
They infer that the money we give might end up gong to Hamas. What? Don't they trust the DEC? These aren't a bunch of leftie students, you know, they are credible charities, ranging from TEARFund to Save the Children, to Help the Aged to Oxfam and the British Red Cross.
BBC Director General Mark Thomson came up with the unbelievable "Inevitably an appeal would use pictures which are the same or similar to those we would be using in our news programmes but would do so with the objective of encouraging public donations. The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story."
I don't think it's ever stopped them from doubting either the credibility or the efficacy of DEC before.
Here's hoping that the BBC's disgraceful stance does for this necessary humanitarian effort what Mike Read's equally bizarre decision to ban did for Frankie Goes to Hollywood's Relax - makes it one of the biggest successes.
Good for Tony Benn, too, for taking the BBC News Channel interviewer to task:
LibDig This!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
