View Full Version : The BBC Is Too Christian .. OFFICIAL ....
Drummond
11-16-2016, 07:04 PM
Actually, that's a spin-off conclusion, coming from a recently-concluded 'Internal Review' at the BBC.
The real point is that the BBC, it's said, should diversify more in what it covers. There is a call - and it looks like it'll happen ? - for the BBC to start transmitting Muslim prayers every Friday.
See ....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/15/bbc-is-too-christian-and-could-broadcast-muslim-prayers-to-refle/
The BBC’s religious output is too Christian, an internal review by the Corporation has concluded, opening the way for more programmes on other faiths.
A report by Aaqil Ahmed, the BBC’s head of religion and ethics, has suggested Muslim, Hindu and Sikh faiths should get more airtime.
One Muslim leader suggested the review could lead to Friday prayers from a mosque being broadcast in the same way that Christian church services currently feature in the BBC’s schedules.
The report is now being considered by Lord Hall, the director general, who could make changes to make religious output less “disproportionate”, the Sunday Times reported.
Mr Ahmed told a Commons meeting on religious literacy he had written a report for Lord Hall that would answer criticisms from non-Christian faiths that they were under-served.
Mr Ahmed said in a statement: “Christianity remains the cornerstone of our output and there are more hours dedicated to it than there are to other faiths.
“Our output in this area is not static, though.
“It has evolved over the years and we regularly assess it."
He added: “We do look at the number of hours we produce, and measure that against the religious make-up of society.”
The number of Muslims in Britain has doubled in a decade to three million.
Ibrahim Mogra, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said the BBC could televise Friday prayers from a mosque and extend coverage of Eid.
But he added: "We would not wish Christians to have any less exposure."
The BBC's religious output on television includes Songs of Praise and Sunday Morning Live, while radio also features a wide range of religious content including Thought for the Day on Radio Four’s Today programme.
Asked whether greater coverage of other faiths could lead to cuts in Christian coverage, a BBC spokesman said it was too early to say which programmes were safe but added that Songs of Praise would be secure.
"We ... are actually intending to do more programming around Christianity and more on other faiths as well, so there is absolutely no question of an 'either or' on our output," he added.
Mr Ahmed's appointment in 2009 was controversial because of allegations he had shown a pro-Islam bias in his previous role at Channel 4.
Hurray more religious programming, can't wait to not watch it!
Abbey Marie
11-16-2016, 07:25 PM
Lol Noir, you crack me up!
Help me understand- are there any privately-owned TV stations in Britain, or is it all BBC?
Drummond
11-16-2016, 07:33 PM
Lol Noir, you crack me up!
Help me understand- are there any privately-owned TV stations in Britain, or is it all BBC?
It's not all BBC by any means - there are others.
ITV (Independent Television) ... it's been around since the mid-1950's.
Channel 4 ... opened in the 1980's. Since then, Channel 5 has also started up. All are terrestrial TV broadcasters.
There are more which started out as all-digital broadcasts ... which is now true of all channels, following the close-down of analogue broadcasting (we now have 'Freeview', which doesn't require a subscription to de-encrypt broadcasts, FreeSat, Sky, Virgin Cable, and maybe one or two other cable distributors). However, the BBC is the one channel whose revenue is absolutely guaranteed, thanks to the mandatory payments taken via the Licence fee.
If you want to watch an TV at all in the UK, the Licence fee MUST be paid. Failure to pay, if you do watch TV at all, is a criminal offence here.
Drummond
11-16-2016, 07:47 PM
By the way, in case anyone's interested ... UK residents able (& willing) to get their television via Sky Satellite, could - if they pay enough in subscriptions, that is - get Fox News. They are the only broadcasting company in the UK who transmit it.
By contrast ... to the best of my knowledge, Al Jazeera is available on every broadcasting medium we have, including Freeview. A few months ago, Freeview even started a high definition feed from them .... which, in my area at least, even outranks our home-grown Sky News's transmissions (standard definition only).
By the way, in case anyone's interested ... UK residents able (& willing) to get their television via Sky Satellite, could - if they pay enough in subscriptions, that is - get Fox News. They are the only broadcasting company in the UK who transmit it.
See you gotta buy your Murdoch owned Sky box, then pay an additional subscription fee on top of your normal subscription fee to Murdoch in order to watch the Murdoch owned Fox News.
All about that $$$
Gunny
11-17-2016, 08:08 AM
By the way, in case anyone's interested ... UK residents able (& willing) to get their television via Sky Satellite, could - if they pay enough in subscriptions, that is - get Fox News. They are the only broadcasting company in the UK who transmit it.
By contrast ... to the best of my knowledge, Al Jazeera is available on every broadcasting medium we have, including Freeview. A few months ago, Freeview even started a high definition feed from them .... which, in my area at least, even outranks our home-grown Sky News's transmissions (standard definition only).
Should get some good old American cable. You get about 1000 channels of which maybe 6-7 are worth watching for about $200 a month. The rest of the channels are the same 3 infomercials repeated endlessly in between "throw it against the wall and see if it sticks" so-called "reality shows".
Now were you to want the "discount packages", they ensure they separate the most popular (watched, I guess) channels into separate packages so you either pay full price anyway or miss out.
Drummond
11-17-2016, 08:32 AM
See you gotta buy your Murdoch owned Sky box, then pay an additional subscription fee on top of your normal subscription fee to Murdoch in order to watch the Murdoch owned Fox News.
All about that $$$
... Yes, Noir ...
I'm 'afraid', Noir, that this is the way the world (most of it) is. Human nature being what it is, people will strive to make profits.They work to generate money. Some get a job and rely on it for a salary. Some take a more dynamic route, and create companies, which generate money from what goods or services they produce. In the process, they also create jobs, livelihoods, and families and communities prosper. Such societies evolve. Such societies reach out and improve the human condition.
Do I REALLY have to tell you all of this, Noir ???
I know the Left hate prosperity. If they all had their way, we'd be living in communes ... or under dictatorships, where one or more persons just dictate to others what THEY want people to put up with in their lives (and where mediocrity, if you're lucky, is the order of things !). But - human nature, when it's free to express itself, does so through variations of a capitalist system .. where people prosper, are enriched, know decent (not mundane and dictated !) lives.
I repeat: do I REALLY have to tell you all of this .. ???
Naughty ol' Murdoch, actually being RICH, PROSPEROUS, being the foundation of a business that creates livelihoods for people. Ah, how you wish you could smash it all up, eh, Noir .. ?
Tell me I'm wrong. Come on ...
Drummond
11-17-2016, 08:41 AM
Should get some good old American cable. You get about 1000 channels of which maybe 6-7 are worth watching for about $200 a month. The rest of the channels are the same 3 infomercials repeated endlessly in between "throw it against the wall and see if it sticks" so-called "reality shows".
Now were you to want the "discount packages", they ensure they separate the most popular (watched, I guess) channels into separate packages so you either pay full price anyway or miss out.
Well, we do have the cable alternative, Gunny. Not sure if it carries 1000 channels, but certainly hundreds of them (some rebroadcast in HD). Subscriptions aren't quite as expensive, but then, our salaries tend not to be as high as yours, so it figures. For Sky, or a premium Virgin Cable package, maybe £100 a month ?
... Yes, Noir ...Do I REALLY have to tell you all of this, Noir??
Nope but you just keep typing, good grief :laugh:
Drummond
11-17-2016, 08:48 AM
Nope but you just keep typing, good grief :laugh:
Yes. I'm sure you'd rather that I didn't.
Well, if I don't need to tell you what I in fact have ... then you should understand not only how the Murdoch 'empire' became what it is today, but also that the human drive was always bound to lead to such a phenomenon in our lives ! Remember the Soviet Union ? Communist, repressive, YET, despite generations of indoctrination, it STILL rotted away.
Why ? Because it ran contrary to human aspiration, when you really get down to it. You just cannot stifle human nature indefinitely.
This, Noir, is the greatest lesson people such as you need to learn. I don't care how 'good' Socialism can be dressed up to appear. The fact is, it must ultimately fail, for the reason I've given.
One day, Socialism will be seen as a pariah philosophy, much as Nazism is now. It WILL happen, because it can't NOT happen. My only concern is how much damage will be done until we reach that new Golden Age.
Gunny
11-17-2016, 08:54 AM
Well, we do have the cable alternative, Gunny. Not sure if it carries 1000 channels, but certainly hundreds of them (some rebroadcast in HD). Subscriptions aren't quite as expensive, but then, our salaries tend not to be as high as yours, so it figures. For Sky, or a premium Virgin Cable package, maybe £100 a month ?
Can't really do the salary comparison thing in the US, nor really with the UK. We have no set standard here. I live quite comfortably in South Texas on what wouldn't pay my rent in NYC. The media moguls charge the same exorbitant rate to all. My daughter pays for it here. What you get for what they charge here would not get them MY business.
I WILL throw their box in the trash and I speak from experience. :)
Drummond
11-17-2016, 09:06 AM
Can't really do the salary comparison thing in the US, nor really with the UK. We have no set standard here. I live quite comfortably in South Texas on what wouldn't pay my rent in NYC. The media moguls charge the same exorbitant rate to all. My daughter pays for it here. What you get for what they charge here would not get them MY business.
I WILL throw their box in the trash and I speak from experience. :)
From what I've seen, salaries for comparable jobs tend to be roughly half here what they'd be in the US.
The same sort of regional variations apply here, though. In my old job in London, it was given an additional 'London Weighting' allowance (actually called that) on top of the 'regular' salary, to allow for increased cost of living costs for being in or near London.
But as you say, and it's true here, packages are just as high no matter where in the UK you live.
I once used to use Sky TV, which made it necessary to use a satellite dish. [They're the one company in the UK willing to take the Fox News feed, so far as I know.] But I no longer use it ... I just use Freeview. Slightly aggravating, since signal strength dips sometimes (we have two regional sets of broadcast receivable in my location, and they vary considerably at times ... the large hills in my part of the world don't help ..). But, its own spectrum of stations is more than adequate for me these days.
Drummond
11-18-2016, 07:46 AM
Just seen THIS ....
http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9487&stc=1
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.