# Newsnight propagandises interview with working single mum



## weepiper (May 29, 2012)

Is there a 'why the BBC is shit/going down the pan' type thread somewhere? I have a memory there is but I couldn't find one, mods can move if there's a better place

http://www.change.org/petitions/bbc...yBkO&utm_medium=email&utm_source=action_alert

This young woman was approached by her manager at work at Tower Hamlets Council to ask if she wanted to be interviewed for Newsnight as a young single mum who needs Housing Benefit. She's been working since she was 16 and has a three year old child. She wasn't expecting them to selectively trim any reference to her working out of the interview when they aired it and imply that she is an unemployed benefit scrounger who should just move back in with her mum. Total misrepresentation. And Boris claims the BBC has a left-wing bias?


----------



## frogwoman (May 29, 2012)

state broadcaster


----------



## articul8 (May 29, 2012)

There is a thread on this already somewhere


----------



## articul8 (May 29, 2012)

Sorry not a thread - end of BBC Narrative on the 70s thread in this forum


----------



## weepiper (May 29, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Sorry not a thread - end of BBC Narrative on the 70s thread in this forum


 
That'll be why I couldn't find anything then


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 29, 2012)

The BBC seems to have forgotten the 'impartiality' clause in its charter.

Are they under pressure from government, or trying to suck up to the government in the hope of not being abolished / sold to Murdoch?


----------



## ska invita (May 29, 2012)

Thing on it here too... picks up on who is Allegra Stratton

http://www.leninology.com/2012/05/what-bbc-newsnight-did-to-shanene.html

can anyone be bothered to check out her bylines for the guardian?


----------



## peterkro (May 29, 2012)

Don't ever collude with the media they have their own agenda and don't give a fuck about you as a person in spite of the lies they may tell you.If you have an ironclad contract to be able to have editorial oversight maybe.


----------



## xes (May 29, 2012)

they are shit, they've also just been busted "accidentally" using pictures of mass bodies from 2003 Iraq, in the ongoing killings/protests in Syria. (think it was Syria)  The BBC = 100% pure propaganda. It's high time people stopped watching/listening to it.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 29, 2012)

Fucking hell.


----------



## frogwoman (May 29, 2012)

what an absolute disgrace.


----------



## OneStrike (May 29, 2012)

Yep, the girl was really stitched up.  She was tweeting to her 50odd followers about how she had been misrepresented after it went out, i'm pleased that she is getting some backing.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 29, 2012)

Despicable.  Utterly despicable.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 29, 2012)

Media Lens is talking about this, too.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 29, 2012)

weepiper said:


> Is there a 'why the BBC is shit/going down the pan' type thread somewhere? I have a memory there is but I couldn't find one, mods can move if there's a better place
> 
> http://www.change.org/petitions/bbc...yBkO&utm_medium=email&utm_source=action_alert
> 
> This young woman was approached by her manager at work at Tower Hamlets Council to ask if she wanted to be interviewed for Newsnight as a young single mum who needs Housing Benefit. She's been working since she was 16 and has a three year old child. She wasn't expecting them to selectively trim any reference to her working out of the interview when they aired it and imply that she is an unemployed benefit scrounger who should just move back in with her mum. Total misrepresentation. And Boris claims the BBC has a left-wing bias?


 
fucking hell, brass eye

"Why don't you live at home with your mum?"

"I have a daughter and she only has a two bedroomed flat"

"So you could live at home with your mum but you choose not to?"

"Er, well, I suppose it is a choice"

"Can't you go around somebody's house and clean in up? And then ask for money afterwards?"


----------



## frogwoman (May 29, 2012)

ska invita said:


> Thing on it here too... picks up on who is Allegra Stratton
> 
> http://www.leninology.com/2012/05/what-bbc-newsnight-did-to-shanene.html
> 
> can anyone be bothered to check out her bylines for the guardian?


 
Fucking guardian.


----------



## weepiper (May 29, 2012)

Divisive Cotton said:


> fucking hell, brass eye
> 
> "Why don't you live at home with your mum?"
> 
> ...


 
Pity they didn't pick someone a little more assertive to interview like that really. Actually I expect that was deliberate. I'd have given them short fucking shrift


----------



## frogwoman (May 29, 2012)

Asking somebody if they should have had a child ffs.


----------



## JimW (May 29, 2012)

xes said:


> they are shit, they've also just been busted "accidentally" using pictures of mass bodies from 2003 Iraq, in the ongoing killings/protests in Syria. (think it was Syria) The BBC = 100% pure propaganda. It's high time people stopped watching/listening to it.


Remember the Nick Robinson edit trying to make the wildcat strikers look like racists a couple of years back? I do.


----------



## frogwoman (May 29, 2012)

this is one of the reasons i don't watch tv news and especially not the bbc any more. i wonder what the NUJ has to say about this? Has anyone contacted them?


----------



## maldwyn (May 29, 2012)

I remember watching that item and thinking Allegra Stratton was being unnecessary aggressive in her interview, glad to hear other people felt the same.


----------



## ska invita (May 29, 2012)

maldwyn said:


> I remember watching that item and thinking Allegra Stratton was being unnecessary aggressive in her interview, glad to hear other people felt the same.


i remember it as being delivered in a gentle, condescending way - what was being asked was the aggression IYNWIM


----------



## weepiper (May 29, 2012)

ska invita said:


> i remember it as being delivered in a gentle, condescending way - what was being asked was the aggression IYNWIM


 
That Lenin's Tomb article above expresses it just right - 'you don't get to decide if you're respectable, young working class single mum, WE get to do that'. Respectability is conferred on from above.


----------



## articul8 (May 29, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> this is one of the reasons i don't watch tv news and especially not the bbc any more. i wonder what the NUJ has to say about this? Has anyone contacted them?


She might be NUJ or BECTU (but probably isn't - bet she's the sort that scabs when they strike).


----------



## nefarious (May 29, 2012)

Reminds me of the joke where there is a banker, a daily mail reader, someone on benefits and 10 pieces of cake.  The banker swipes 9 of the pieces and nudges the daily mail reader pointing at the person on benefits and says 'look out, he's trying to steal your cake'


----------



## elbows (May 29, 2012)

Time to dust off twitter and share my thoughts on this, if I can compose myself. Disgusting.

Her account:

@BBCAllegra


----------



## elbows (May 29, 2012)

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/b...snight-humilated-single-mother-shanene-thorpe


----------



## where to (May 29, 2012)

disgusting.


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 29, 2012)

> We both know people who are living with their parents who don't have a job.


 
That's the deliberately misleading line Stratton puts in to make viewers believe Shanene was also unemployed. She's sealed her reputation as a deceitful, lying twat. That's pretty vile stuff.


----------



## temper_tantrum (May 29, 2012)

The NUJ are busy going bankrupt, I'm afraid.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 29, 2012)

That would be the Allegra Stratton who is married to _The Spectator_'s James Forsyth (named in 'Britain's 50 Most Powerful Posh People Under 30', that _Mail_ article which also banged on about Otis Ferry and Tamsin Omond), right?

Perhaps it's all just jealousy, seeing as she lives with her in-laws.


----------



## where to (May 29, 2012)

the victim is on twitter and being quite vocal. 

silence from AS right now is deafening. she's obviously praying it blows over.

lets make sure it doesn't go away.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 29, 2012)

Let Emmanuel College Cambridge-educated, _Spectator_-spoused, usual-old-Establishment-prejudice-espousing Allegra Stratton know your opinion of her journalistic standards on twitter: @BBCAllegra.

Let worked-in-proper-jobs-since-she-was-16, child-rearing, full-time-employed Shanene Thorpe know what you think of the way she was treated: @Nenes_Life


----------



## William of Walworth (May 29, 2012)

ska invicta said:
			
		

> Thing on it here too... picks up on who is Allegra Stratton
> 
> http://www.leninology.com/2012/05/what-bbc-newsnight-did-to-shanene.html
> 
> can anyone be bothered to check out her bylines for the guardian?


 


frogwoman said:


> Fucking guardian.


 
That just looks kneejerk froggy.

Fucking _BBC_ you *surely* mean with this. I'm not convinced that Allegra Stratton even works for the Guardian any more -- but will check in a minute.

ETA -- she doesn't any more, and she was rather dull-ly MOTR when she did as I recall, nothing stand-out exceptional, in fact why TF did someone as ordinary as her get so senior at the Graun? And even more, why was she 'headhunted' for the BBC, old boy/old girl network aside? I suppose that last q answers itself, maybe now her true colours are displaying a lot more nakedly than before, as that leninist blog nails pretty well.

PS I'm in full agreement with what most are posting here about stitch ups with this BBC interview etc.


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2012)

Have you got some kind of alert set for when someone slags of the guardian? Its been 10 years now William. You aren't going to convince anyone.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 29, 2012)

goldenecitrone said:


> That's pretty vile stuff.


 
Entirely agreeing with this. I should emphasise!


----------



## DexterTCN (May 29, 2012)

I fail to see why a previous employer is relevant unless she took the same line there.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 29, 2012)

killer b said:


> Have you got some kind of alert set for when someone slags of the guardian? Its been 10 years now William. You aren't going to convince anyone.


 
Read my other posts in context (and with its edits). I'm having a pop at the BBC FFS. And given that unlike most I suspect, I've actually read this woman's dull bland stuff in the Graun a while back. She was poor then, a lot worse now apparantly. Not defending her, nor the Guardian for employing her.

The BBC should be the main focus is pretty much all I was aiming at.

I don't want to persuade people to love the Guardian, that's never been my intention, I'm as critical of it as you are at times, and have been for years, in fact I'm far more obective about it than most here because I read the fucking thing.

But that's not even the subject of this thread which is why I picked up on the frogster's line ...

Apols for derail, but!


----------



## William of Walworth (May 29, 2012)

DexterTCN said:


> I fail to see why a previous employer is relevant unless she took the same line there.


 
Which she didn't AFAIC?? Not that she was much _good_ then IMO.


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2012)

You love it William, don't lie. You curl up at night snuggled up to an Alan Rusbridger dakimakura.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 29, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> Media Lens is talking about this, too.


 
Could you link please danny? Is it just their messageboards, or is there an article/blog too .... have to go to bed imminently so couldn't pick this up there on a quick search

Ta -- looks like a good site anyway.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 29, 2012)

killer b said:


> You love it William, don't lie. You curl up at night snuggled up to an Alan Rusbridger dakimakura.


 
 

Na, just read some stuff most days, Mainly football sometimes!


----------



## tar1984 (May 29, 2012)

What a horrible interview, and so obviously agenda laden.  I felt genuinely uncomfortable watching that.  The BBC are not meant to do this type of thing.


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2012)

Yes they are. And they always have done.


----------



## weepiper (May 29, 2012)

killer b said:


> Yes they are. And they always have done.


 
This. This is the most brazen example of it I've seen for a while though. Good on this lassie for not letting them off with it.


----------



## tar1984 (May 29, 2012)

killer b said:


> Yes they are. And they always have done.


 
I know they do but they are not meant to.  As a public broadcaster I mean, they aren't supposed to have an agenda.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

temper_tantrum said:


> The NUJ are busy going bankrupt, I'm afraid.


 
Again? This has got to be about the 5-6th time in the last 30 years.


----------



## Fedayn (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> I know they do but they are not meant to. As a public broadcaster I mean, they aren't supposed to have an agenda.


 
Taken form the Ladybird book of media?


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> I know they do but they are not meant to.  As a public broadcaster I mean, they aren't supposed to have an agenda.


Bless.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

killer b said:


> You love it William, don't lie. You curl up at night snuggled up to an Alan Rusbridger dakimakura.


 
Fuck's sake, you wrong'un!! I nearly tossed me cookies onto me keyboard from the horrible image that conjured up!


----------



## tar1984 (May 29, 2012)

Fedayn said:


> Taken form the Ladybird book of media?


 
No I mean they are accountable in a way that sky news or the like aren't.  

I don't know why you are accusing me of being naive because I am obviously aware that they have certain agendas and fail to provide balanced reporting on a lot of things.


----------



## Fedayn (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> No I mean they are accountable in a way that sky news or the like aren't.
> 
> I don't know why you are accusing me of being naive because I am obviously aware that they have certain agendas and fail to provide balanced reporting on a lot of things.


 
They aren't accountable in the slightest. They have a facade of accountability that's all.


----------



## tar1984 (May 29, 2012)

killer b said:


> Bless.


 
Oh more patronising how nice


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> What a horrible interview, and so obviously agenda laden. I felt genuinely uncomfortable watching that. The BBC are not meant to do this type of thing.


 
Nope, they *are* supposed to do that sort of thing.

They're expected to do it with far more finesse, though, so that the blade slides in unnoticed, rather than do some blatant stabby shit.


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2012)

They aren't really accountable though are they? Not to us.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> I know they do but they are not meant to. As a public broadcaster I mean, they aren't supposed to have an agenda.


 
Not quite. They're supposed to be "independent of government". That can be taken to mean many different things, depending on what someone in Broadcasting House wishes to accomplish.


----------



## tar1984 (May 29, 2012)

Fedayn said:


> They aren't accountable in the slightest. They have a facade of accountability that's all.


 


ViolentPanda said:


> Nope, they *are* supposed to do that sort of thing.
> 
> They're expected to do it with far more finesse, though, so that the blade slides in unnoticed, rather than do some blatant stabby shit.


 


killer b said:


> They aren't really accountable though are they? Not to us.


 
But you can use that facade of accountability to challenge them in a way you couldn't with a private broadcaster?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> No I mean they are accountable in a way that sky news or the like aren't.
> 
> I don't know why you are accusing me of being naive because I am obviously aware that they have certain agendas and fail to provide balanced reporting on a lot of things.


 
Well, "accountability" is a bit of a moveable feast when it comes to public services. I mean, "accountability" of junior staff for the minutiae of their work, fair enough, but accountability for journalistic output when the corporation has been doing it's best for the last few years to pretend it's the best friend the government (whichever party is in power) has ever had? Not bloody likely.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> But you can use that facade of accountability to challenge them in a way you couldn't with a private broadcaster?


 
Not really, because the access the public has to complaining about content is "skin deep", hence crap like Points of View, which is basically just a forum for an occasional broadcaster's _mea culpa_ mixed in with some viewer views. That's it. That's the official "accountability" we have access to - complaints procedures and "Points of View".


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> Oh more patronising how nice


 
You love it really!


----------



## Fedayn (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> But you can use that facade of accountability to challenge them in a way you couldn't with a private broadcaster?


 
The reversal of film by BBC editors that showed miners attacking coppers at orgreave in the 1984 miners strike when it started the other way round, has still never been 'paid for' They got away with that. Ironically SKY will probably get away with less now NotW has been turned over. The BBC has little accountability. Remember the farce over the DEC appeal over Gaza in 2009? Thompson ignoring license payers having met previously with Ariel Sharon, hardly accountable is it?!


----------



## frogwoman (May 29, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> That just looks kneejerk froggy.
> 
> Fucking _BBC_ you *surely* mean with this. I'm not convinced that Allegra Stratton even works for the Guardian any more -- but will check in a minute.
> 
> ...


 
No i mean fucking guardian. Bunch of traitorous cunts. That's what happens when you employ scum. Is she still on their books?


----------



## tar1984 (May 29, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Not really, because the access the public has to complaining about content is "skin deep", hence crap like Points of View, which is basically just a forum for an occasional broadcaster's _mea culpa_ mixed in with some viewer views. That's it. That's the official "accountability" we have access to - complaints procedures and "Points of View".


 
Yeah I wouldn't really expect much to change from people complaining. I remember the Jody McIntyre incident a couple of years back... thousands of complaints and the BBC dimissed it as online 'nerd rage' or something.

I just meant it annoys me more coming from the BBC, I mean it isn't even subtly done it's basically an attack on the girl.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> Yeah I wouldn't really expect much to change from people complaining. I remember the Jody McIntyre incident a couple of years back... thousands of complaints and the BBC dimissed it as online 'nerd rage' or something.
> 
> I just meant it annoys me more coming from the BBC, I mean it isn't even subtly done it's basically an attack on the girl.


i was quite impressed with them ignoring all the many thousands of complaints about the jerry springer opera.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> Yeah I wouldn't really expect much to change from people complaining. I remember the Jody McIntyre incident a couple of years back... thousands of complaints and the BBC dimissed it as online 'nerd rage' or something.
> 
> I just meant it annoys me more coming from the BBC, I mean it isn't even subtly done it's basically an attack on the girl.


 
I used to be a bit idealistic about the BBC, but what Birtism started, with making management more important than production, has meant ever lesser concentration on content, while concern with box-ticking and "popularity"/ratings/viewing figures has never been greater.  Basically you've got shite piled on shite, all of which contribute to the BBC sailing ever further from it's original remit to become a broadcaster of poor journalism and vapid entertainment.


----------



## tar1984 (May 29, 2012)

Fedayn said:


> The reversal of film by BBC editors that showed miners attacking coppers at orgreave in the 1984 miners strike when it started the other way round, has still never been 'paid for' They got away with that. Ironically SKY will probably get away with less now NotW has been turned over. The BBC has little accountability. Remember the farce over the DEC appeal over Gaza in 2009? Thompson ignoring license payers having met previously with Ariel Sharon, hardly accountable is it?!


 
Yup I have done some reading on their reporting on Israel and Palestine. It is really unbalanced, and provably so, in favour of the Isreali discourse.

There have been attempts to make them accountable for that but it never changes. I'm not that naive to not realise that, more that I think what they are supposed to be & not what they actually are like. I mean, they _claim_ to be balanced don't they?


----------



## albionism (May 29, 2012)

I have avoided opening a twitter account until now.
This issue has made me open one specifically to lend
my support to Shanene Thorpe. What an absolute outrage.
That's not journalism, that's being a total cunt.


----------



## killer b (May 29, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> I mean, they _claim_ to be balanced don't they?


so does pretty much every news provider. Its meaningless.


----------



## Nylock (May 29, 2012)

weepiper said:


> Is there a 'why the BBC is shit/going down the pan' type thread somewhere? I have a memory there is but I couldn't find one, mods can move if there's a better place
> 
> http://www.change.org/petitions/bbc...yBkO&utm_medium=email&utm_source=action_alert
> 
> This young woman was approached by her manager at work at Tower Hamlets Council to ask if she wanted to be interviewed for Newsnight as a young single mum who needs Housing Benefit. She's been working since she was 16 and has a three year old child. She wasn't expecting them to selectively trim any reference to her working out of the interview when they aired it and imply that she is an unemployed benefit scrounger who should just move back in with her mum. Total misrepresentation. And Boris claims the BBC has a left-wing bias?


Has that e-petition gone into meltdown or something? i have signed it but my signature is still processing after reading the entire thread from this post!


----------



## weepiper (May 29, 2012)

albionism said:


> I have avoided opening a twitter account until now.
> This issue has made me open one specifically to lend
> my support to Shanene Thorpe. What an absolute outrage.
> That's not journalism, that's being a total cunt.


 
I might do the same actually.


----------



## tar1984 (May 29, 2012)

killer b said:


> so does pretty much every news provider. Its meaningless.


 
That's true.  It maybe annoys me more because the BBC is publically funded.


----------



## alfajobrob (May 30, 2012)

Nylock said:


> Has that e-petition gone into meltdown or something? i have signed it but my signature is still processing after reading the entire thread from this post!


 
Hopefully with numbers...duly signed & even commented (rarity for me) as well and ta for Ska for the Lenin's tomb link btw.


----------



## killer b (May 30, 2012)

This is likely to be a popular campaign across the whole political spectrum isn't it? It's got something everyone can latch onto...


----------



## alfajobrob (May 30, 2012)

killer b said:


> This is likely to be a popular campaign across the whole political spectrum isn't it? It's got something everyone can latch onto...


 
I think I get what you mean in regards the right could say how disgraceful such a "hard working mother" was victimised like this and still portray people on benefits as scoungers & the left can just try and tell the truth?


----------



## elbows (May 30, 2012)

Im not convinced that would be enough to make it really popular with that side of the spectrum. I don't really think they want attention drawn to examples of their crude propaganda gone pear shaped. They'll dress the issue up as suggested if forced to talk about it, but I don't think there is much mileage in it for them to go out of their way to feed off this story, theres too much risk in terms of where it might lead, especially now that there is something of a backlash against austerity brewing.

Exceptions to this may include those who will bash the bbc for anything they can, even if it means they end up criticising something they are secretly glad the bbc does as it serves their agenda.


----------



## killer b (May 30, 2012)

alfajobrob said:


> I think I get what you mean in regards the right could say how disgraceful such a "hard working mother" was victimised like this and still portray people on benefits as scoungers & the left can just try and tell the truth?


Oportunities for some BBC kicking too.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 30, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> No i mean fucking guardian. Bunch of traitorous cunts. That's what happens when you employ scum. *Is she still on their books?*


 
I don't think you read my reply previous page though did you? Not properly I mean? Because I actually answered that exact question!

Side issue I know, the above and what you and I posted earlier is really for the Guardian thread I'd say ...happy to get into this _over there_ if you like though 

But let's focus on the BBC in this one, because they're the principal villains here surely?


----------



## William of Walworth (May 30, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> [re BBC agenda setting/government line establishing]
> They're expected to do it with far more finesse, though, so that the blade slides in unnoticed, rather than do some blatant stabby shit.


 
I agree, and that was my main reaction when I saw this story first. The sheer *crudity* of the stitch up on this particular occasion. In that other BBC thread, the long established 'government propaganda on the BBC' one, we've been bleating for months on and off about their agenda setting, but it does _usually_ tend to be a bit 'softer' and not so *blatantly* obvious -- except to committed politicos/media obsessives. This time, not so. Which among lots of other things only goes to prove how crap Alegra Stratton is  

Oh and I agree with others, nice one to the 'interview'ee woman for not letting it lie ...


----------



## William of Walworth (May 30, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Not really, because the access the public has to complaining about content is "skin deep", hence crap like Points of View, which is basically just a forum for an occasional broadcaster's _mea culpa_ mixed in with some viewer views. That's it. That's the official "accountability" we have access to - complaints procedures and "Points of View".


 
PoV has been a bit rubbish for years hasn't it? Minor moans and particular gripes, and almost never anything remotely political or serious. Minutiae rather than anything more.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Could you link please danny? Is it just their messageboards, or is there an article/blog too .... have to go to bed imminently so couldn't pick this up there on a quick search
> 
> Ta -- looks like a good site anyway.


Just on the message board.  But they specialise in hounding the media by email.  If they decide to take up the issue, they'll email out a (usually lengthy) account of the media transgression to their support network, along with the emails for the journo/news desk/editor in question.  They then share the responses and repeat the process, responding to the responses and so on.  They're pretty dogged.  It's not like these petition websites; the campaigns are specific, targeted and intelligent. 

How much good does it do?  Well it doesn't alter the structures that cause the media to transgress in the first place.  They've been picking up on misrepresentation of Israel/Palestine for years, for example, and continue to do so.  But I guess it's good somebody does it.  

Sign up for their emails, Will.  I think it'd be up your street.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 30, 2012)

Nice one. Will definitely have a closer look at the site when I get more time, and you never know I might just follow your suggestion


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> No I mean they are accountable in a way that sky news or the like aren't.
> 
> I don't know why you are accusing me of being naive because I am obviously aware that they have certain agendas and fail to provide balanced reporting on a lot of things.


Tar, have you read Chomsky and Herman's _Manufacturing Consent_?  It's old, but still relevant.  Also worth looking at (and more specific to the BBC) is Philo and Berry's _Bad News from Israel_.  (It's been updated since I read it to _More Bad News from Israel_, which I have on my shelf, but haven't read yet, so can't comment on specifically).


----------



## tar1984 (May 30, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> Tar, have you read Chomsky and Herman's _Manufacturing Consent_? It's old, but still relevant. Also worth looking at (and more specific to the BBC) is Philo and Berry's _Bad News from Israel_. (It's been updated since I read it to _More Bad News from Israel_, which I have on my shelf, but haven't read yet, so can't comment on specifically).


 
I have read sections of More Bad News From Israel... Greg Philo is one of my lecturers.  That's the one I was talking about further up the thread.


----------



## tar1984 (May 30, 2012)

I haven't read manufacturing consent


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

tar1984 said:


> I haven't read manufacturing consent


It's worth a go, especially to get an idea of the Propaganda Model and how it works.  (Which is slightly different when applied to the BBC as it doesn't have advertisers).


----------



## tar1984 (May 30, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> It's worth a go, especially to get an idea of the Propaganda Model and how it works. (Which is slightly different when applied to the BBC as it doesn't have advertisers).


 
I'll read it Danny, thanks for the tip.  I like a bit of Chomsky.


----------



## articul8 (May 30, 2012)

Just had a reply back from my complaint to the Beeb:



> Dear XXXXXX
> 
> Thank you for contacting us regarding ‘Newsnight’, broadcast on 23 May 2012.
> 
> ...






Not really, no  _Why _was her situation misrepresented?  Has the apology been made publically, on air?


----------



## krink (May 30, 2012)

If the 20 thousand who have signed the petition could also go here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complain-online/ then that would be good.


----------



## Streathamite (May 30, 2012)

krink said:


> If the 20 thousand who have signed the petition could also go here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complain-online/ then that would be good.


will do, at lunch


----------



## articul8 (May 30, 2012)

I've followed up on their inadequate response with a second complaint


----------



## past caring (May 30, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> Asking somebody if they should have had a child ffs.


 
Actually, it was far, far worse - Stratton asked why, given her circumstances, she chose to _keep_ her child, not why she had a child in the first place.


----------



## Psychonaut (May 30, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Just had a reply back from my complaint to the Beeb:


 
very sly or very ignorant wording, imo _'We are happy to __accept her contention that her current situation was not made clear'_

'her current situation'; makes it sound like a change in circumstances, as if shes just recently found a job rather than having been in employment all along, ever since her HB payments originally started.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

Psychonaut said:


> very sly or very ignorant wording, imo _'We are happy to __accept her contention that her current situation was not made clear'_
> 
> 'her current situation'; makes it sound like a change in circumstances, as if shes just recently found a job rather than having been in employment all along, ever since her HB payments originally started.


Cunts.  Don't drop it.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Just had a reply back from my complaint to the Beeb:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Any what is the implication of the phrase "current situation"?  Doesn't that seem as if this is just a technicality?


----------



## articul8 (May 30, 2012)

It means "Ok she might actually be in a job at the moment...but she's _just the sort_ that would be a benefits scrounger" and probably will be on the dole soon


----------



## butchersapron (May 30, 2012)

Nice to see a real genuine 100% fact described as a 'contention'.


----------



## frogwoman (May 30, 2012)

Stop benefit scrounging by putting people out of work.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 30, 2012)

I really dislike that the BBC's complaint box is only a 1,000 odd characters.  I want to write more dammit.  But complaint submitted and petition signed (obviously).


----------



## frogwoman (May 30, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> I really dislike that the BBC's complaint box is only a 1,000 odd characters. I want to write more dammit. But complaint submitted and petition signed (obviously).


 
That's another reason why it's going down the pan. Didnt used to be like that.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

What approximate time did it air?


----------



## purenarcotic (May 30, 2012)

the 23rd May I believe.  Or so the clip on the petition says.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 30, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> That's another reason why it's going down the pan. Didnt used to be like that.


 
I think you can still phone them up and have a go, but I dunno if there's an actual e-mail somewhere you can write to,


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> the 23rd May I believe. Or so the clip on the petition says.


That's the date.  I have that.  The complaint for asks for an approximate time.  I know Newsnight airs at 10.30, but I mean the piece.  

Complaints will be taken more seriously if they come from people who saw the programme.

(Oh, and I won't be signing the petition).


----------



## purenarcotic (May 30, 2012)

Oh, I don't know, I just said I didn't remember.  It's probably still on iplayer if you wanted to trawl through it. 

Why not signing the petition, out of interest?


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Oh, I don't know, I just said I didn't remember. It's probably still on iplayer if you wanted to trawl through it.
> 
> Why not signing the petition, out of interest?


I don't sign petitions, as a generality.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 30, 2012)

Fair enough.


----------



## frogwoman (May 30, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> I don't think you read my reply previous page though did you? Not properly I mean? Because I actually answered that exact question!
> 
> Side issue I know, the above and what you and I posted earlier is really for the Guardian thread I'd say ...happy to get into this _over there_ if you like though
> 
> But let's focus on the BBC in this one, because they're the principal villains here surely?


 
i think rather than the guardian or bbc being principal villains it displays the bubble world in which these people live tbh. it displays the culture in which breaking of journalistic ethics is acceptable, desirable even. imagine sitting in a room and doctoring an interview to make it out like somebody had said something different to what they'd said. imagine what sort of cunt you'd have to be to do that, but they think it's normal.


----------



## Clair De Lune (May 30, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> That's the date. I have that. The complaint for asks for an approximate time. I know Newsnight airs at 10.30, but I mean the piece.
> 
> Complaints will be taken more seriously if they come from people who saw the programme.
> 
> (Oh, and I won't be signing the petition).


just checked....from 7mins on


----------



## Ms Ordinary (May 30, 2012)

krink said:


> If the 20 thousand who have signed the petition could also go here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complain-online/ then that would be good.


 
I will, when I've watched it again tonight (unless there is a transcript anywhere).
Was she really asked why she chose to keep her child?  I missed that bit when I watched.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Fair enough.


I have, however, lodged a complaint, and look forward to disparaging their reply.  And continuing and continuing until Allegra Stratton's 'current situation' changes.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

Clair De Lune said:


> just checked....from 7mins on


I guessed 10.45.


----------



## past caring (May 30, 2012)

Ms Ordinary said:


> I will, when I've watched it again tonight (unless there is a transcript anywhere).
> Was she really asked why she chose to keep her child?  I missed that bit when I watched.


 
They didn't air that part of the interview - but she says that's what she was asked and it's reported in the stateman piece linked to on the first page of this thread.


----------



## Ms Ordinary (May 30, 2012)

ta


----------



## Blagsta (May 30, 2012)

articul8 said:


> I've followed up on their inadequate response with a second complaint


They'll likely just ignore you. It seems to be their MO at the moment.


----------



## articul8 (May 30, 2012)

Blagsta said:


> They'll likely just ignore you. It seems to be their MO at the moment.


 
Yes, expect so - but I wanted to say how this isn't just an unfortunate misrepresention of one individual's circumstances.  They think that since the neoliberal line on welfare is shared by the leaderships of all 3 main parties - they aren't showing "bias" by reinforcing it.  But clearly by reinforcing these perceptions, they are effectively propagandising for austerity.


----------



## Blagsta (May 30, 2012)

I complained about them misrepresenting DLA last year, got a weasel reply. I responded that it wasn't a satisfactory reply and stated why and heard nothing more.


----------



## Nylock (May 30, 2012)

Complaint sent.


----------



## temper_tantrum (May 30, 2012)

BBC complaints dept are one of the worst, most unresponsive, most dismissive, least transparent bunches of people I've ever contacted. About on a par with the Royal Mail complaints people.

Twitter, petitions, coverage in other media outlets etc is far more likely to get a response on this than just writing in to the complaints people, I'm afraid.


----------



## Nylock (May 30, 2012)

temper_tantrum said:


> BBC complaints dept are one of the worst, most unresponsive, most dismissive, least transparent bunches of people I've ever contacted. About on a par with the Royal Mail complaints people.
> 
> Twitter, petitions, coverage in other media outlets etc is far more likely to get a response on this than just writing in to the complaints people, I'm afraid.


 
Yep, this is the pro-forma reply i got from them:


> Thank you for contacting us regarding ‘Newsnight’, broadcast on 23 May 2012.
> 
> ‘Newsnight’ was sorry to hear Shanene Thorpe was unhappy following her interview. While the BBC is still yet to receive a formal complaint, ‘Newsnight’ contacted Shanene to hear her concerns. We are happy to accept her contention that her current situation was not made clear and have apologised.
> 
> ...


 
...response time was quick so i'm assuming they are getting a lot of grief about this...


----------



## Nylock (May 30, 2012)

BTW, how do you make a 'formal' complaint to the BBC?


----------



## butchersapron (May 30, 2012)

Nylock said:


> BTW, how do you make a 'formal' complaint to the BBC?


You put on a shirt and tie before emailing them.


----------



## treelover (May 30, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> I don't sign petitions, as a generality.


 

nor do i, but I signed this one , by name and wrote some comments, its great she is taking the BBC on, I've been in constant struggle with them over welfare issue reporting for about five years, its gruelling and dispiriting..


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

Dear Mr "La Rouge"

Thank you for contacting us regarding ‘Newsnight’, broadcast on 23 May 2012.

‘Newsnight’ was sorry to hear Shanene Thorpe was unhappy following her interview. While the BBC is still yet to receive a formal complaint, ‘Newsnight’ contacted Shanene to hear her concerns. We are happy to accept her contention that her current situation was not made clear and have apologised.

We hope this allays your concerns, thanks again for taking the time to contact us.

Kind Regards

BBC Complaints

www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

NB This is sent from an outgoing account only which is not monitored. You cannot reply to this email address but if necessary please contact us via our webform quoting any case number we provided.


----------



## butchersapron (May 30, 2012)

I wonder, does _Allegra_ keep romanian slaves in her garage? Is she one of the BBC people taking advantage of their tax-doging scemes?


----------



## treelover (May 30, 2012)

oh, and it is much harder for a complaint from an individual with no power to get her/his issue 'up the ladder' to the Trust, etc, than it is for politicians, partys, corps, etc, despite their denials, she should ask the Trust to look at it, and contact Greg Philo(though he will probably say he is too busy)


----------



## Streathamite (May 30, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> Let Emmanuel College Cambridge-educated, _Spectator_-spoused, usual-old-Establishment-prejudice-espousing Allegra Stratton know your opinion of her journalistic standards on twitter: @BBCAllegra.
> 
> Let worked-in-proper-jobs-since-she-was-16, child-rearing, full-time-employed Shanene Thorpe know what you think of the way she was treated: @Nenes_Life


good work that man


----------



## Streathamite (May 30, 2012)

Nylock said:


> Has that e-petition gone into meltdown or something? i have signed it but my signature is still processing after reading the entire thread from this post!


good Lord, I had exactly the same problem!


----------



## treelover (May 30, 2012)

don't know anything about twitter but Shanenes post is is being retweeted by some big names inc JK Rowling and Mariella Frostup, Gabby Logan..


----------



## butchersapron (May 30, 2012)

Worth pointing out that if you ask the BBC what they pay _Allegra, _if you enquire into their relationship in the way that she did with this woman, they will refuse to tell you and point out that under the terms of the FOIA they have no requirement to disclose details of what _talent_ (their term) is paid.


----------



## articul8 (May 30, 2012)

> ‏@*PennyRed*





> @*Nenes_Life* certainly. If you'd like to chat to me about it, please email me- know the basics already. Laurie.penny @*gmail*.com


Guess who's here to save the day? Phew!!


----------



## butchersapron (May 30, 2012)

Yeah, penny now gets to do her own version of parasiting off this woman.


----------



## Clair De Lune (May 30, 2012)

Wasn't the Allegra a shit 80's car? Sounds familiar.


----------



## butchersapron (May 30, 2012)

That was the _portia_.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 30, 2012)

Got the same rubbish spewed back to me as everybody else has. 

What a load of fucking arse.


----------



## articul8 (May 30, 2012)

_Allegro_ - used to get a lift to school from next-door-but one who had one.  Kept backfiring and I was embarrassed to get out!


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 30, 2012)

I do hope that the Victoria Carson over whose name the BBC's non-apology apology is being presented is not the same Victoria Carson who previously worked as Campaigns Manager and Spokesman for the Forum of Private Business.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 30, 2012)

Clair De Lune said:


> Wasn't the Allegra a shit 80's car? Sounds familiar.



The Austin Allegro was fucking ace


----------



## articul8 (May 30, 2012)

err, no. It wasn't. It was worse that my Dad's old Morris Marina:


----------



## Citizen66 (May 30, 2012)

articul8 said:


> err, no. It wasn't. It was worse that my Dad's old Morris Marina:



I look back fondly at images from my past. I'm not claiming it to be high performance or anything. I love motors from the 70s and 80s. Cortina mk II is probably my favourite.

Edit: cortina mk III i mean. And sorry for derail.


----------



## Clair De Lune (May 30, 2012)

http://afluffywabbit.blogspot.co.uk/2009/08/austin-allegro-ode-to-worst-car-ever.html


----------



## articul8 (May 30, 2012)

It's started to grow on me:


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Got the same rubbish spewed back to me as everybody else has.
> 
> What a load of fucking arse.


Keep going.  Where's the public retraction? What do they mean "contention"?  What do they mean "current situation"?  Why did Allegra lie in the first place?  Who oversaw the lie?  What size of extended family does Allegra think should live in a flat?  How many generations per bedroom?  etc.

Scab cunts.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 30, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> Keep going. Where's the public retraction? What do they mean "contention"? What do they mean "current situation"? Why did Allegra lie in the first place? Who oversaw the lie? What size of extended family does Allegra think should live in a flat? How many generations per bedroom? etc.
> 
> Scab cunts.


 
Yup, having a restorative fag and then I'll be back on it.   Really annoying you can't reply to the e-mail but have to go through the whole form filling exercise again.  I bet they've done that deliberately to put people off going back in for round two.


----------



## butchersapron (May 30, 2012)

What i find really hateful, really revealing in this, is the way that _ Allegra _can barely bring herself to even look at Shanene Thorpe. I could feel the contempt, the disgust from here.


----------



## elbows (May 30, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Yeah, penny now gets to do her own version of parasiting off this woman.


 
To be fair Penny and some of the others who may get involved were first tweeted by the girl who was interviewed, last night, when she went on a bit of a spree trying to gain support.


----------



## Clair De Lune (May 30, 2012)

Yep and it was obviously a shock for Shanene at how she was being treated too, you could see her looking more and more puzzled and on edge. I would have walked out after verbally abusing her back most likely. But who knows when put on the spot like that


----------



## butchersapron (May 30, 2012)

elbows said:


> To be fair Penny and some of the others who may get involved were first tweeted by the girl who was interviewed, last night, when she went on a bit of a spree trying to gain support.


The seagulls are only following the trawler  Penny will get her sardine one way or another.


----------



## Ms Ordinary (May 30, 2012)

Nylock said:


> Yep, this is the pro-forma reply i got from them:
> 
> 
> ...response time was quick so i'm assuming they are getting a lot of grief about this...


 
Yes, mine got bounced back pretty quickly as well (didn't bother waiting till I'd got home since they probably aren't reading these anyway). I'll follow it up with a response when I get home FWIW.


----------



## Ms Ordinary (May 30, 2012)

Clair De Lune said:


> Yep and it was obviously a shock for Shanene at how she was being treated too, you could see her looking more and more puzzled and on edge. I would have walked out after verbally abusing her back most likely. But who knows when put on the spot like that


 
One of Shanene's early tweets says she'd been emailed 4 questions prior to the interview... none of which she was asked in the interview  .


----------



## purenarcotic (May 30, 2012)

Ms Ordinary said:


> One of Shanene's early tweets says she'd been emailed 4 questions prior to the interview... none of which she was asked in the interview  .


 
She should make those questions public so we can see how different the expectation was from the reality.


----------



## two sheds (May 30, 2012)

Should complaints be going to Ofcom?


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 30, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> That would be the Allegra Stratton who is married to _The Spectator_'s James Forsyth (named in 'Britain's 50 Most Powerful Posh People Under 30', that _Mail_ article which also banged on about Otis Ferry and Tamsin Omond), right?


 
Oh, and guess who was one of the high-flying guests at the Stratton-Forsyth wedding last year?
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2011/08/mcgovern-tommy-ids-rights
Man-o'-the-people Ed Miliband.


----------



## purenarcotic (May 30, 2012)

Well, I told them I wanted a personal response and not a ridiculous stock answer and have got this in reply: 



> Thanks for contacting the BBC. This is an automated email confirming we received the complaint submitted in this name via www.bbc.co.complaints. Please do not reply since this email is automatically generated from an account which is not monitored. If you have received this in error please contact us using our webform at www.bbc.co.uk/complaints.
> 
> We attach the text of the complaint for your records. We will log this shortly and then normally include it in our overnight reports to BBC staff of all audience reaction. These will be made available for staff to read tomorrow (with your personal details removed) to ensure that your points reach the right people.
> 
> To make sure that we use the licence fee efficiently we may not investigate and respond to every complaint in detail but we aim normally to reply within 10 working days (around 2 weeks). For full details of the complaints procedure and how we consider the issues raised in complaints please see our information at www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle-complaint/


 
Hmm.  So do you think this means I will eventually get a proper response or they're trying to fob me off.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 30, 2012)

Update to petition signers:



> Dear XXX
> 
> I got an unexpected call at work yesterday -- from Newsnight Editor, Peter Rippon. (So they do know I've got a job after all!)
> 
> ...


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 30, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Well, I told them I wanted a personal response and not a ridiculous stock answer and have got this in reply:


 
Snap 

I would imagine the previous non-apology apology was automatically sent out to anyone logging the right date, Newsnight & Shanene Thorpe in their complaint; and that everyone who then recomplained demanding a proper explanation is now in a queue. A very long queue.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

> BBC staff moving to Media City in Salford Quays from London, will receive a tax-free lump-sum payment of £8,000. This is to cover the costs of various relocation expenses.
> 
> 
> Freedom of Information Act required the payment sum to be revealed. Alongside the £8,000, staff will be allowed to claim £1,900 a month in expenses if they choose to keep their house in London before making a permanent move to Manchester; a £3,000 allowance for house fittings such as curtains and carpets and as previously reported by the BBC, they are offering to purchase some employees houses with the owners receiving 85% of the market value.


http://www.bdrecruitment.com/news/news-article.php?id=229

Why doesn't Allegra move in with her mother?


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2012)

Oh, and for those who haven't found it yet:

Peter Rippon, Editor, Newsnight, BBC 2
peter.rippon@bbc.co.uk


----------



## articul8 (May 30, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> Oh, and for those who haven't found it yet:
> 
> Peter Rippon, Editor, Newsnight, BBC 2
> peter.rippon@bbc.co.uk


Nice one, cheers


----------



## fadrats (May 30, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> Oh, and for those who haven't found it yet:
> 
> Peter Rippon, Editor, Newsnight, BBC 2
> peter.rippon@bbc.co.uk


 
You could try here too...

Helen Boaden, Director of BBC News.
helenboaden.complaints@bbc.co.uk


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 30, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> http://www.bdrecruitment.com/news/news-article.php?id=229
> 
> Why doesn't Allegra move in with her mother?



Presumably because she doesn't need to, if she is living with her husband's family whilst salaried out of the public purse.


----------



## butchersapron (May 30, 2012)

Or with her sister _portia_.


----------



## krink (May 30, 2012)

they're going to have to give him a new email now...


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (May 30, 2012)

two sheds said:


> Should complaints be going to Ofcom?


 
Probably. When you work for the BBC you have to now complete and pass an impartiality, and correct representation test 'for everything', even if you are just editing, following someone elses orders. You are then responsible if any programme fails in these basic respects.
These rules are actually hard to follow when making regular TV shows but that's when you are not pushing an agenda, and really nobody would notice anyway.
The newsnight show clearly broke every rule, and technically every person who worked on the show should have to answer for not officially flagging up what went on.
I don't really think they can brush this off.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 30, 2012)

Here's the Ofcom link:

https://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/tell-us/specific-programme-epg


----------



## butchersapron (May 30, 2012)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Probably. When you work for the BBC you have to now complete and pass an impartiality, and correct representation test 'for everything', even if you are just editing, following someone elses orders. You are then responsible if any programme fails in these basic respects.
> These rules are actually hard to follow when making regular TV shows but that's when you are not pushing an agenda, and really nobody would notice anyway.
> The newsnight show clearly broke every rule, and technically every person who worked on the show should have to answer for not officially flagging up what went on.
> I don't really think they can brush this off.


Who edits the editors. Ah...


----------



## sleaterkinney (May 30, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Well, I told them I wanted a personal response and not a ridiculous stock answer and have got this in reply:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm. So do you think this means I will eventually get a proper response or they're trying to fob me off.


They do that for all complaints, you might get a proper reply, you might not.


----------



## two sheds (May 30, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> Here's the Ofcom link:
> 
> https://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/tell-us/specific-programme-epg


 
ta


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (May 30, 2012)

sleaterkinney said:


> They do that for all complaints, you might get a proper reply, you might not.


 
I don't know what the BBC has to do but at ITV, as a producer I would have to personally reply to every question or complaint that demanded an answer, and they made sure I did it as well. I assume there is a similar department at the BBC that force replies too.


----------



## _angel_ (May 30, 2012)

Can someone on twitter ask her, would she be happy paying 5 or 6 times more in council tax so that the council the young woman works at can actually pay her a living london wage?


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 30, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Can someone on twitter ask her, would she be happy paying 5 or 6 times more in council tax so that the council the young woman works at can actually pay her a living london wage?


 
What makes you think she pays any Council Tax anyway?


----------



## Ms Ordinary (May 30, 2012)

Clair De Lune said:


> Yep and it was obviously a shock for Shanene at how she was being treated too, you could see her looking more and more puzzled and on edge. I would have walked out after verbally abusing her back most likely. But who knows when put on the spot like that


 
Am just watching this again (on the New Statesman link) and have just caught sight of Allegra's smug expression about 21 seconds in when she's about to start stitching her up .

And right at the end, Shanene looks to be trying to explain her situation better ("I'm just asking for help towards... I'm not asking for a free handout...) and is swiftly cut off...


----------



## Citizen66 (May 30, 2012)

Ms Ordinary said:


> Am just watching this again (on the New Statesman link) and have just caught sight of Allegra's smug expression about 21 seconds in when she's about to start stitching her up .


 
Yeah that's where I saw the clip. Allegra comes across as a vile Tory cunt.


----------



## where to (May 30, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> Oh, and for those who haven't found it yet:
> 
> Peter Rippon, Editor, Newsnight, BBC 2
> peter.rippon@bbc.co.uk


 
bingo.


----------



## weepiper (May 30, 2012)

Loving that Shanene is not letting this drop and not taking their pathetic excuse for an apology until it's made on air.


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 30, 2012)

Just watching Newsnight now. Did Paxman just compare the Greek economy to a bad kebab? Nice bit of sneering.


----------



## treelover (May 31, 2012)

I don't think he did exactly, he said something like the Euro PTB would ''expunge Greece like a bad kebab'' but yes, stereotypes were used...


----------



## treelover (May 31, 2012)

weepiper said:


> Loving that Shanene is not letting this drop and not taking their pathetic excuse for an apology until it's made on air.


 
Yes, but it is in danger of running out of steam, any ideas?


----------



## ska invita (May 31, 2012)

goldenecitrone said:


> Just watching Newsnight now. Did Paxman just compare the Greek economy to a bad kebab? Nice bit of sneering.





treelover said:


> I don't think he did exactly, he said something like the Euro PTB would ''expunge Greece like a bad kebab'' but yes, stereotypes were used...


either way hes a sneering grouse shooting cnut


----------



## danny la rouge (May 31, 2012)

treelover said:


> Yes, but it is in danger of running out of steam, any ideas?


In what way?  Do you mean the rate of growth of the petition? There's 23,555 signatures on the petition, which is a pretty impressive total for a unknown woman to collect in a few days.  

I was wondering if there was any way of finding out what number of complaints the BBC has had.  I know in the past complaint logs have been leaked - I was once emailed one for the first day of the Iraq war.  

I know nothing about Facebook and Twitter, but I'm assuming those are being used?  I've emailed the story around (in my quaint and gerontic manner).


----------



## danny la rouge (May 31, 2012)

treelover said:


> Yes, but it is in danger of running out of steam, any ideas?


Been giving it some thought.  How about contacting Samira Shackle, who wrote the New Statesman piece?  (samira@newstatesman.co.uk).

I see she's published the standard reply that Newsnight has sent out.  You could see if she thinks there are any more hooks to take the story forward.  For example, maybe she could ask how many complaints the BBC has received.  "BBC receives x number of complaints" is always a story.  You could try her with what's meant by "contention" and "current status", whether there will be a public retraction, and how the lie was allowed in the first place, who was responsible, whether it could happen again etc.  But she'll need a bit more than that to take the story forward, I imagine.  The culture of stereotyping benefits recipients in this way/attitude of the questioning is obviously the important point, but if nobody has taken that on before now, they'll need more than that to run with the story now.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (May 31, 2012)

I'm pretty sure the BBC have to release the number of complaints they received if they are asked.


----------



## Dhimmi (May 31, 2012)

When did single parent become an insult? I vaguely recall it was the Sun and the Mail who delighted in using it in the early eighties and it's a great shame for lazy journalists to pick such a group to bully and create such a mythical monster. Single parents can be so many different types of folk with a whole range of circumstances yet the media likes to portray them as Vicki Pollard type characters who only ever got pregnant to get a house etc. Sad to see the Beeb devolve to 80's tabloidism.


----------



## Thora (May 31, 2012)

The story should be about how low wages are, and how high housing costs and childcare are.  I also work for a council, and if I worked full time my wage would be 3k less than the cost of rent+childcare.


----------



## Ms Ordinary (May 31, 2012)

I've been wondering if it wasn't Allegra / Newsnight that got stitched up a bit in the first place...

As in: researcher phones up Tower Hamlets council to find them a "single mum on housing benefit", assuming that would automatically mean workshy dolescum. Council finds them a "single mum on housing benefit" which is just what they asked for, but when they turn up for the interview she turns out to be working full time & there isn't time to find anyone else so they have to wing the interview.
IF that's what happened (pure speculation), it would be their own stupid fault for being so clueless.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 31, 2012)

Sorry, you're suggesting that despite lazy research, poor interview preparation, editorialising, misrepresenting a member of the public through editing and voiceover etc expensively-educated cross-media political editor Allegra Stratton might in fact be the victim here?


----------



## danny la rouge (May 31, 2012)

(((Allegra)))


----------



## _angel_ (May 31, 2012)

Thora said:


> The story should be about how low wages are, and how high housing costs and childcare are. I also work for a council, and if I worked full time my wage would be 3k less than the cost of rent+childcare.


There's a programme on this week sometime (maybe tonight??) on ITV on this subject.
The BBC prefer to stick with lazy cliches of being a single mum, though. Sad.


----------



## Ms Ordinary (May 31, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> Sorry, you're suggesting that despite lazy research, poor interview preparation, editorialising, misrepresenting a member of the public through editing and voiceover etc expensively-educated cross-media political editor Allegra Stratton might in fact be the victim here?


 
Only a 'victim' (not my word) of her own stupidity (or that of the researcher or whoever found the interviewee for her).
It was more a thought that people often do assume that a single parent claiming Housing Benefit will be someone that isn't working, rather than that anyone had tried to set them up.

Lazy research & poor interview preparation would cover the scenario I described, the rest we know she's done.


----------



## rover07 (May 31, 2012)

Its very possible. I doubt Allegra Whatsherface even knew housing benefit could be claimed by people in work.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 31, 2012)

How is Allegra Stratton having preconceptions and presenting falsehoods as truth in any way her being 'stitched up'?

Bizarre.


----------



## Ms Ordinary (May 31, 2012)

I mean, I've no doubt they _are_ cynical fucks who would manipulate the interview & assume they would get away with it, but surely in the whole of London they could have found a single mum on Housing Benefit who _wasn't_ working.

Stitched up was just a bad way of describing it.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 31, 2012)

You'd think so, but again that's not Allegra Stratton being stitched up, that's Allegra Stratton being a shit, lazy, ideologically-motivated hack!


----------



## Captain Hurrah (May 31, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> (((Allegra)))


----------



## treelover (May 31, 2012)

There was ironically a very good discussion on Newsnight about how many politician love and seek to replicate the Victorian era, Kate Williams the historian was fierce in saying we are going back to that time, now, with many welfare policies and attitudes informed by that of the workhouse..

Tristam Hunt however, thinks there are things to learn on welfare from the periods...


----------



## Streathamite (May 31, 2012)

treelover said:


> Tristam Hunt however, thinks there are things to learn on welfare from the periods...


exactly what you'd expect from a Tory historian


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 31, 2012)

Ms Ordinary said:


> I mean, I've no doubt they _are_ cynical fucks who would manipulate the interview & assume they would get away with it, but surely in the whole of London they could have found a single mum on Housing Benefit who _wasn't_ working.
> 
> Stitched up was just a bad way of describing it.


 
Likely to be harder than you think, given that more than 85% of HB claimants nationally are in work.


----------



## treelover (May 31, 2012)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/31/shanene-thorpe-judged-victimised-newsnight

Shanene's story in now in the Guardian...


----------



## Nylock (May 31, 2012)

Nice that the Graun have given her a platform, shame about the usual cast of smug boneheads that infiltrate the comments section below though...


----------



## Nylock (Jun 1, 2012)

Well, looks like the online petition has broken the 25k mark for signatories


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 1, 2012)

Nylock said:


> Well, looks like the online petition has broken the 25k mark for signatories


I wonder how many of those complained to the BBC?


----------



## Streathamite (Jun 1, 2012)

Ms Ordinary said:


> I've been wondering if it wasn't Allegra / Newsnight that got stitched up a bit in the first place...
> 
> As in: researcher phones up Tower Hamlets council to find them a "single mum on housing benefit", assuming that would automatically mean workshy dolescum. Council finds them a "single mum on housing benefit" which is just what they asked for, but when they turn up for the interview she turns out to be working full time & there isn't time to find anyone else so they have to wing the interview.
> IF that's what happened (pure speculation), it would be their own stupid fault for being so clueless.


 since when was it TH's job to do the legwork for smug, lazy patronising journalistic who substitute proper newshoundery for their own preconceptions?


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jun 1, 2012)

Ms Ordinary said:


> Only a 'victim' (not my word) of her own stupidity (or that of the researcher or whoever found the interviewee for her). Lazy research & poor interview preparation would cover the scenario I described, the rest we know she's done.


I've done a handful of interviews with different BBC radio programmes over the years, I guess because of my job and that I'm easy to find on Google.  I'm the first one who pops up.  They never give you any warning, they will call and they'll give you like an hours notice for radio.  

I've also been asked to be interviewed on TV, but it's always been too short notice, like, 'in a couple of hours' sort of thing.  

The researchers are so last minute with finding people, it's unbelievable. They always have an agenda and if you don't fit it, they do bend you to fit. 

So I agree, hurried researcher needed to find someone at short notice but couldn't, so with Shanene they made do. Shit isn't it?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 1, 2012)

pinkmonkey said:


> I've done a handful of interviews with different BBC radio programmes over the years, I guess because of my job and that I'm easy to find on Google. I'm the first one who pops up. They never give you any warning, they will call and they'll give you like an hours notice for radio.
> 
> I've also been asked to be interviewed on TV, but it's always been too short notice, like, 'in a couple of hours' sort of thing.
> 
> ...


I was once interviewed for Newsnight (well Newsnicht - the Scottish opt out at the end).  I was treated very well, they didn't stitch me up at all.  The interviewer was a very nice man whose name escapes me for now.  Someone on here dared me to see how often I could bring Chomsky into it.  I got a few in, but they only used one.

But I've also been interviewed for newspapers, and badly misquoted.  Once I was even quoted without having been interviewed!  It wasn't anything I wouldn't have said if I'd been asked, but I wasn't.  They'd made it up.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jun 1, 2012)

There is an interview with me on some journalists blog and it is such a crock of shit, I don't think she took her notes down properly.


----------



## mizmixit (Jun 1, 2012)

It's actually almost funny that they pick on someone who is doing exactly what 'they' want ie working regardless of whether or not they are paid enough money to live on


----------



## Quartz (Jun 1, 2012)

treelover said:


> Tristam Hunt however, thinks there are things to learn on welfare from the periods...


 
Like what not to do? People at the bottom need both a helping hand and protection from exploitation.


----------



## Quartz (Jun 1, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> But I've also been interviewed for newspapers, and badly misquoted. Once I was even quoted without having been interviewed! It wasn't anything I wouldn't have said if I'd been asked, but I wasn't. They'd made it up.


 
I trust you sued them and won squillions.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 1, 2012)

Quartz said:


> I trust you sued them and won squillions.


No.

Although I should have sued Radio Clyde, who billed me as a Green Party representative once!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 2, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> No.
> 
> Although I should have sued Radio Clyde, who billed me as a Green Party representative once!


 
Dirty smearing bastards!


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jun 4, 2012)

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/...-admits-subsistence-income-scam-2012053029040


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 4, 2012)

That's quite funny.


----------



## Voley (Jun 4, 2012)

> they should complete at least 900 job applications per day while wearing lead clogs.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 4, 2012)

End of.


----------



## treelover (Jun 5, 2012)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complaint/newsnight_23052012/

It's an official complaint to the BBC now, on their website


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 5, 2012)

treelover said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complaint/newsnight_23052012/
> 
> It's an official complaint to the BBC now, on their website


Cheers Treelover.

Look at this bit:   "there was no question of intentional bias, just a misunderstanding".

My arse.


----------



## articul8 (Jun 5, 2012)

> Some of the ideas being considered are controversial, including restricting housing benefits for young people who could be living at home and encouraging people to have fewer children


 
So the correct thing to do was to put these "controversial" ideas forward as though they were the opinions of the interviewer (with the authority of apparently "reasonable" opinion)?  And this was not "intentional bias"?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 7, 2012)

My complaint about my complaint being brushed off is now slowly working its way through the BBC process - got another (longer) standard reply this morning, a mere eight days on from when I contacted them:



> Dear xxx
> 
> Your Reference xxx
> 
> ...


 
I imagine there are many more such machine emails being churned out to angry punters across the land at the moment.

One wonders whether, had this assiduous attention to procedures been applied to _Newsnight_'s journalistic process, all of this hubbub might have been avoided for the Beeb.


----------



## Nylock (Jun 7, 2012)

I had the same email today as well...


----------



## where to (Jun 7, 2012)

Nylock said:


> I had the same email today as well...



i had an email today too, but quite different. mine features a lengthy bit of text from director of newsnight, rippon. willl post up soon, cant on this machine unfortunately.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 7, 2012)

Nylock said:


> I had the same email today as well...


Me too.


----------



## Ms Ordinary (Jun 8, 2012)

Nylock said:


> I had the same email today as well...


Yes - now that the BBC have posted up the response from Rippon on their complaints page, I'm waiting to see if I just get another email with that C&P'd in.


----------



## articul8 (Jun 8, 2012)

More than likely


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 14, 2012)

I've just had the same email for the second time.


----------



## Quartz (Jun 14, 2012)

At least you're getting a reply. I've yet to receive even an acknowledgement. Typical ministerial cunt, too self-important to interact with the plebs.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 14, 2012)

Bit more info here:



> Working with Tower Hamlets council to source interviewees, Stratton apparently rejected a string of possible candidates on the basis that:
> 
> “You must have got people living on benefits as a lifestyle choice!”
> 
> ...


----------



## articul8 (Jun 14, 2012)

mandatory abortions for the poor?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 14, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> a brave council official ventured to suggest to Stratton that she sounded like an Edwardian eugenicist arguing that the poor shouldn’t breed


That's _exactly_ what she sounds like.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jun 14, 2012)

Portia, lol.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 18, 2012)

Email update from Shanene:



> "I am genuinely sorry that you were made to feel uncomfortable...and I apologise."
> Peter Rippon, Newsnight Editor
> 
> It's been the craziest few weeks of my life. I thought bringing up a little girl while working full time was hard enough -- add to that journalists turning up on my doorstep, interviews, thousands of tweets and even strangers recognising me at work.
> ...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 21, 2012)

And now another bullshit reply from the Beeb, helpfully enclosing Rippon's non-apology statement, but not addressing any of my points:



> Dear XXX
> 
> Reference XXX
> 
> ...



Anyone actually get a proper reply yet?


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 21, 2012)

> We feel it’s important to stress that we received a wide range of feedback about this issue;


 
No you didn't.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 21, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> And now another bullshit reply from the Beeb, helpfully enclosing Rippon's non-apology statement, but not addressing any of my points:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone actually get a proper reply yet?


I got the same one as that.  It doesn't answer any of the questions I asked, and adds more to the list I want answered.


----------



## articul8 (Jun 22, 2012)

yes same here.  Although without this bit


> We feel it’s important to stress that we received a wide range of feedback about this issue; considerable correspondence to us has been generated by online lobby activity. Bearing in mind the pressure on resources, the previous response sent to you strived to address the majority of concerns raised and we apologise if not all of the specific points you mentioned were been answered in the manner you prefer.


 
you can just hear them saying they're not _proper_ complaints, it's just been whipped up on the internet


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 22, 2012)

Ask them what sort of supportive feedback  they had in in their wide range.


----------



## articul8 (Jun 22, 2012)

complaint now sent to the ECU - calling for an on air apology and acknowledgement that the interview was unreasonably biased.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 22, 2012)

I'm going to put a FOI asking what Allegra's subsidy from the public purse is and if she takes advantage of the BBC's tax avoidance scheme. I know the answer will be that they have no statutory obligation to disclose what the talent (their term) is paid - they always do. Nice to get it - and their utter contempt for norms - in writing though.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jun 23, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> And now another bullshit reply from the Beeb, helpfully enclosing Rippon's non-apology statement, but not addressing any of my points:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone actually get a proper reply yet?


 
No - I've just had the same thing.  Complaint sent to ECU.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 10, 2012)

Latest response:



> Dear Mr Cinzano
> 
> I'm writing to acknowledge your complaint to the ECU, and to say that we
> have now received a complaint from Ms Thorpe herself.  I hope to be able
> ...


----------



## articul8 (Jul 10, 2012)

I've not had that yet


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2012)

Fraser was on 85 grand a year for that job 3 years ago.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 10, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Fraser was on 85 grand a year for that job 3 years ago.


 
Topped up to more than ninety grand!

His DoI makes interesting reading too - he seems to have forgotten to include his interest in a property development company..?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 1, 2012)

"Please don't ask how bent, nepotistic or 'in the club' our high-flying _Newsnight_ talent is, it hurts our freedom of expression!"

FoI request response from the Beeb (I paraphrase).


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 1, 2012)

Exactly what i got - they always say they're not obliged to reveal info about 'talent' - and they included in that the costs of hiring that election boat and stuffing food and drink down celebs night at our expense as well.


----------



## cesare (Aug 1, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> "Please don't ask how bent, nepotistic or 'in the club' our high-flying _Newsnight_ talent is, it hurts our freedom of expression!"
> 
> FoI request response from the Beeb (I paraphrase).



So have you written to the IC?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 1, 2012)

cesare said:


> So have you written to the IC?


 
String this one out first 

Then it's dink-dink-dink time on every head above the parapet.


----------



## cesare (Aug 1, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> String this one out first
> 
> Then it's dink-dink-dink time on every head above the parapet.



Pushing them on the Public Interest Test?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 1, 2012)

That and the 'journalism, art and literature' get-out - since when did "I'm an artist, darling!" supersede appropriate and non-discriminatory recruitment? Auntie's Oxbridge grad hacks have certainly prowled around the (perceived) Spanish practices and pork barrel scrapings of other organisations.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 1, 2012)

They're legally watertight on this i'm afraid. It would have to be a battle of...morals!


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 1, 2012)

It's not a question of whether or not they are legally watertight - it's about identifying the class enemy and making life as personally/professionally awkward, uncomfortable and complicated as possible, on the grounds that they can dish it but they can't take it.


----------



## cesare (Aug 1, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> It's not a question of whether or not they are legally watertight - it's about identifying the class enemy and making life as personally/professionally awkward, uncomfortable and complicated as possible, on the grounds that they can dish it but they can't take it.


 
Also, at some point there's always the hope (albeit perhaps vain) that a subversive employee will innocently release the info.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 1, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> It's not a question of whether or not they are legally watertight - it's about identifying the class enemy and making life as personally/professionally awkward, uncomfortable and complicated as possible, on the grounds that they can dish it but they can't take it.


That's what i said.


----------



## articul8 (Aug 8, 2012)

latest reply



> Further to my message of 11 July, I'm afraid I haven't yet been able to
> come to a conclusion on your complaint because key people in BBC News
> whom I need to consult with have been on leave.  I shall be away myself
> between 10 and 24 August, but I hope to be in a position to let you know
> ...


 
Given that the original complaint was filed in June this is really shit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2012)

articul8 said:


> latest reply
> 
> 
> 
> Given that the original complaint was filed in June this is really shit.


Oh dear

They've realised you're an ineffectual complainant and so are fobbing you off with a load of auld shit secure in the knowledge you are such an invertabrate you'll do nothing to rock the boat


----------



## articul8 (Aug 8, 2012)

It's not like it's been sent to everyone or anything... (old school tie gets better results does it?)


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 8, 2012)

Anyone care to estimate suspect list numbers for when Steel Towers inevitably gets knocked over whilst Fraser's on his hols?


----------



## treelover (Aug 8, 2012)

sorry, don't understand any of that...


----------



## treelover (Aug 8, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> Oh dear
> 
> They've realised you're an ineffectual complainant and so are fobbing you off with a load of auld shit secure in the knowledge you are such an invertabrate you'll do nothing to rock the boat


 

this bitching is ridiculous, he complained and is persevering, good


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2012)

treelover said:


> this bitching is ridiculous, he complained and is persevering, good


"endeavour to persevere"


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2012)

articul8 said:


> It's not like it's been sent to everyone or anything... (old school tie gets better results does it?)


truth hurts, don't it. you're a fucking useless complainant.


----------



## articul8 (Aug 9, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> truth hurts, don't it. you're a fucking useless complainant.


Oh yeah, what should I have done then?  Did they teach you at prep school?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 9, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Oh yeah, what should I have done then?  Did they teach you at prep school?


What you should have done was not to be fobbed off like a cunt with the ovious shite that 'there's no one in the office who can answer your question' like they'd let all the senior management all piss off together. Not only is this not rocket science, it is barely fucking multiplication. You've been played for the sucker you so clearly are.


----------



## articul8 (Aug 9, 2012)

Make a complaint about the complaints unit?   All getting very Kafka... This is already the 3rd complaint made on the same issue already.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 9, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Make a complaint about the complaints unit?   All getting very Kafka... This is already the 3rd complaint made on the same issue already.


I've complained about the handling of a complaint before now, and i'm not the only one


----------



## poisondwarf (Aug 30, 2012)

According to shanene's twitter, the formal apology will be on tonight's newsnight.


----------



## JHE (Aug 30, 2012)

poisondwarf said:


> According to shanene's twitter, the formal apology will be on tonight's newsnight.


Yup, just been broadcast


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 31, 2012)

About 44m45s into the 30/8/12 episode.

Basically it was all a mix up! But obviously the guys were happy to clarify that Shanene was imagining the whole thing.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 31, 2012)

Here's today's email from Fraser 'Man Of' Steel:



> Dear Whingebag
> 
> We have now concluded our investigation into Shanene Thorpe’s complaint.  I’m sorry this took longer than we initially led you to expect, which was because of the absence of key people on holiday, but I hope you’ll be pleased to know that we concluded that the nature and degree of unfairness to her was such that a broadcast correction and apology was appropriate, in addition to the online apology already posted by the Editor of Newsnight.  Accordingly, last night’s edition of the programme included the following (with Ms Thorpe’s agreement):
> 
> ...


 
So that's alright then.


----------



## articul8 (Sep 1, 2012)

No attempt to understand how the "mistaken impression" arose and what assumptions lay behind it


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2012)

More to the point, it makes the same lazy question begging assumptions as the original piece of bullshit - it says that _yes we were wrong this time but look at the millions of other feckless wasters were really are doing it:_



> that unfairly created the mistaken impression that she was unemployed and wholly dependent on benefits, and suggested that she was living off the state as a lifestyle choice.


 
Note also, this is from an organisation and from people whose entire institution and occupation lives off the state as a lifestyle choice.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 1, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> More to the point, it makes the same lazy question begging assumptions as the original piece of bullshit - it says that _yes we were wrong this time but look at the millions of other feckless wasters were really are doing it:_




Yet they couldn't find a single person who actually is one of these millions of scroungers.



> Note also, this is from an organisation and from people whose entire institution and occupation lives off the state as a lifestyle choice.


 
Same as the politicians who are trying to convince us how bad that is.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 1, 2012)

Innit, so many scroungers that they couldn't find any of them


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 1, 2012)

The sneaky fuckers


----------



## treelover (Sep 1, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> Here's today's email from Fraser 'Man Of' Steel:
> 
> 
> 
> So that's alright then.


 
Lots of 'benefits bingo' in that apology, did Shanene, actually ask for the term, (I sincerely hope she didn't) 'lifestyle choice' to be included, this was once just used by the hard right of the Tory party and then NL, so now it is used by Newsnight editors...


----------



## articul8 (Sep 4, 2012)

My latest chat with Fraser;



> Dear Mr Steel
> 
> That is all very well, but it doesn't address the critical question of WHY this "mistaken impression" was created, and the assumptions behind the editorial decisions.  In fact in re-iterating the language about "living off the state as a lifestyle choice", the apology itself compounds the issue behind my complaint.
> 
> ...


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 4, 2012)

I honestly don't see how they could think that if the facts were straight (as Allegra thought so) the questions were legitimate. Basically the BBC are so far up Tory arse on this one they can't see daylight.

That 'apology', whether on Newsnight or not, was nothing of the kind. Shame on them.


----------



## binka (Sep 4, 2012)

was a good bit by paul mason just on newsnight about the number of people going to food banks. then an in studio discussion where some bloke called danny kruger made himself look like an absolute cunt talking about personal responsibility


----------



## Libertad (Sep 4, 2012)

This is the cunt:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Danny_Kruger


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 2, 2012)

_Newsnight_ editor Peter Rippon in the firing line again for spiking report detailing many complaints of child sex abuse against Jimmy Savile:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-ra...savile-abuse-allegations-newsnight?CMP=twt_gu


----------



## cesare (Oct 2, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> _Newsnight_ editor Peter Rippon in the firing line again for spiking report detailing many complaints of child sex abuse against Jimmy Savile:
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-ra...savile-abuse-allegations-newsnight?CMP=twt_gu


They all seem to be stepping away from it and pointing at him, don't they?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 2, 2012)

cesare said:


> They all seem to be stepping away from it and pointing at him, don't they?


Officer class mentality!


----------



## killer b (Oct 2, 2012)

blog from the cunt.

i liked this line.



> What was the public interest served by reporting it given he is dead? The nature of the allegations and the level of proof required. The fact the incidents were 40 years ago.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 5, 2012)

killer b said:


> blog from the cunt.
> 
> i liked this line.


God, that's nauseating. So what if was 40 years ago or more, don't the victims deserve more than to be dismissed? If it happened to his sister, mother or daughter I doubt he'd say the same. What a twat.


----------



## treelover (Oct 5, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> Officer class mentality!


 
not defending him, but he originally went to a Comp and not Oxbridge...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Oct 5, 2012)

weepiper said:


> Is there a 'why the BBC is shit/going down the pan' type thread somewhere? I have a memory there is but I couldn't find one, mods can move if there's a better place
> 
> http://www.change.org/petitions/bbc...yBkO&utm_medium=email&utm_source=action_alert
> 
> This young woman was approached by her manager at work at Tower Hamlets Council to ask if she wanted to be interviewed for Newsnight as a young single mum who needs Housing Benefit. She's been working since she was 16 and has a three year old child. She wasn't expecting them to selectively trim any reference to her working out of the interview when they aired it and imply that she is an unemployed benefit scrounger who should just move back in with her mum. Total misrepresentation. And Boris claims the BBC has a left-wing bias?


 
I wonder why they didn't just use an unemployed person for the interview?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 5, 2012)

treelover said:


> not defending him, but he originally went to a Comp and not Oxbridge...


And?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 20, 2012)

killer b said:


> blog from the cunt.
> 
> i liked this line.


Complete contradiction of Rippon's version from _Newsnight_ journalist Liz MacKean in the _Obbo_:



> In her email to Entwistle, dated 8 October, which has been leaked to newspapers, MacKean denied Entwistle's assertion that the story was "about the Surrey police investigation" and rejected an account by _Newsnight_ editor Peter Rippon, who posted a blog on 2 October, the day before ITV's documentary on Savile, explaining his decision to drop the BBC's story.
> 
> "Ever since the report was dropped, just ahead of it being edited, there have been repeated misleading statements from the press office about the nature of our investigation," MacKean wrote. "To see what began as a BBC story running large on ITV is a hard thing. For it not to be mentioned in any way on _Newsnight _is another, quite absurd, thing. But worst of all has been what seems like a concerted effort to make it appear that our story was about something else, something that could be dropped and forgotten ahead of fulsome tribute programmes. It is this which seems to be fuelling the damaging claims of a cover-up."


 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/20/jimmy-savile-bbc-protecting-stars

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...cuse-bbc-of-jimmy-savile-coverup-8218971.html


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 22, 2012)

Rippon's out, and there's a statement correcting his blog from 2 October:



> _The following is a statement issued by the BBC_
> 
> The BBC has launched an independent review, led by former Head of Sky News Nick Pollard, to determine whether there were any failings in the BBC's management of the Newsnight investigation into allegations of sexual abuse of children by Jimmy Savile.
> 
> ...


 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2012/10/jimmy_savile_and_newsnight_a_c.html


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2012)

Is anyone actually pulling at this string? This is from an email from Mackean to a mate:



> "PR [Peter Rippon] says if the bosses aren't happy... [he] can't go to the wall on this one."


 
is anyone asking who these bosses are and why they would already at this stage be unhappy? Or have i just missed it?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

Someone seems to be at last - unless there's been masses of work being done is secret right now.

Could Newsnight's editor really have acted alone on the Jimmy Savile story?


----------



## cesare (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Someone seems to be at last - unless there's been masses of work being done is secret right now.
> 
> Could Newsnight's editor really have acted alone on the Jimmy Savile story?


It's classic scapegoating "look, over there, he was the one that acted on his own" when any fule no that the BBC bosses (or indeed any bosses) don't allow their employees to make decisions at odds with the corporate ethos.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2012)

cesare said:


> It's classic scapegoating "look, over there, he was the one that acted on his own" when any fule no that the BBC bosses (or indeed any bosses) don't allow their employees to make decisions at odds with the corporate ethos.


Indeed, which is why i'm surprised that people have allowed the focus to be narrowed down on Rippon almost alone.


----------



## cesare (Oct 24, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Indeed, which is why i'm surprised that people have allowed the focus to be narrowed down on Rippon almost alone.


Because it's easier to focus on one culpable individual than it is to point at the entire structure of an organisation? It's why the Met has got away with it for so long too, look at what it took for people to even start to entertain the concept of institutionalised <whatevers>. I managed to find the entire notes of that age/sex country file presenter's ET and it's on similar lines. The BBC have a backstop position to protect themselves against vicarious liability for the acts of their employees and it boils down to the organisation "reflecting the needs of its viewing audience" I.e. society is to blame.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2012)

cesare said:


> Because it's easier to focus on one culpable individual than it is to point at the entire structure of an organisation? It's why the Met has got away with it for so long too, look at what it took for people to even start to entertain the concept of institutionalised <whatevers>.


 
Which is particularly annoying given that the sort of "closed community" that organisation like the Beeb, the Met or the courts produce is especially vulnerable to the generation and retention of institutional prejudices, and policy-makers and social scientists have been aware of this for the best part of a century.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 5, 2013)

BBC still (as expected) using the 'journalism, art or literature' cop-out to avoid answering what the personal circumstances, business interests or political affiliations of Rippon and Stratton (or anyone else working for them) are.



> [...]
> 
> The Supreme Court specifically discussed the public interest at some length in their judgment on the Balen Report; they acknowledged the public interest in accessing information about the work of public authorities, but went on to identify that the reason for the inclusion of ‘the derogation’ in the Act was itself due to a corresponding public interest in allowing the BBC to fulfil its broadcasting functions without interference:
> 
> ...


 
In other words: the BBC works in your interest and it is not in your interest to know how the BBC works. And it's terribly complicated so you probably wouldn't understand, or would leap to the wrong conclusion.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/business_and_other_registerable#incoming-366508


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 23, 2013)

Tonight:




> *BBC Newsnight* ‏@*BBCNewsnight*
> "This government has discriminated against stay at home mums and implied they are lazy" mum of two Laura Perrins tells #bbcnewsnight#*bbcnewsnight*
> 11:26 PM - 23 Apr 13


 
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/326824433094385664


----------



## treelover (Apr 23, 2013)

I was in the other room when that was on, but has the programme on the TV, it sounded like a right heated argument..


----------



## sihhi (Dec 28, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> BBC still (as expected) using the 'journalism, art or literature' cop-out to avoid answering what the personal circumstances, business interests or political affiliations of Rippon and Stratton (or anyone else working for them) are.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, the business interests have to be kept under lid:

Here is the Policy Editor of Newsnight, who worked for along while for Conservative David Willetts, declaring: "And how can you privatise a university? They've never been publicly owned."


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 8, 2020)

O hai Allegra, ai here u got nu job









						Allegra Stratton to be Boris Johnson's TV spokeswoman
					

Former Guardian political correspondent to be appointed as PM’s representative




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 11, 2020)

Seems appropriate:











						You're right to worry about a revolving door between the Tories and the BBC
					

Last night news broke that two senior BBC journalists held meetings with the Tories about moving to work at Number 10. Let's talk about neutrality shall we?




					www.huckmag.com


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 8, 2021)

Just bumping this to laugh at Stratton, ha ha you fucking deceitful piece of shit.

Maybe she can stitch up an interview of herself.
(Shame is that she'll have raked it in in the mean time)


----------



## Plumdaff (Dec 8, 2021)

Remember Allegra, it's always a choice.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 8, 2021)

I'm happy to go with Fern's assessment


----------



## elbows (Dec 8, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> I'm happy to go with Fern's assessment


----------



## hitmouse (Dec 8, 2021)

Have people been posting this much today? Haven't seen it yet, feels appropriate:


----------



## GarveyLives (Dec 8, 2021)

*"Soweth" .... "Reaps".*​


----------



## Steel Icarus (Dec 8, 2021)

"Only upset because I was caught"


----------



## redcogs (Dec 8, 2021)

lost my top job which i only got through being a well connected toad creature for boris.  boohoo.  goodfuckinridance til you re-emerge elsewhere in the slime.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 8, 2021)

just heard the audio of her crying 
ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣ha 🤣
classic


----------

