大象传媒

The Queen's Non-Strop:

So, we're now being told the pictures of the Queen apparently leaving the photo-shoot are in fact of her entering.

The question, then, is: why, in that case, is she fuming, saying "I'm not changing anything"?

That strongly suggests someone had previously asked her to change what she was wearing.

Is it possible that the photo-shoot was actually in several sessions, so the pictures shown may well have been of her *entering* for a session, but *after* an earlier session at which she had been asked to remove her "crown"? And she's still fuming about it! Or were the "sessions" inadvertant, with the pictures shown being of the Queen coming back to resume after she had stormed out?

In which case the 大象传媒's apology is, in fact, nothing more than deference to the monarch.

Whilst viewing itself as balanced and objective, the 大象传媒, far from being an edgy voice from the radical sidelines, is often, perhaps unfairly, considered to be a mouthpiece of the British Establishment. Few holds are barred on Newsnight when critiquing government policy. However, the attention paid by the 大象传媒, including Newsnight, to the UK monarchy addresses the agenda of reactionary people, and the tastes of people who enjoy the fantasy of pomp and celebrity. It seems to me that the royalist agenda always prevails, forever speaking over or belittling the edgy voices of alternative views.

Nice to see the PC brigade out in force, rather then attack the Queen, I suggest you query why the 大象传媒 has lied to the British Public.

Of course you cannot do this as it would insult your Republican views, although your views may be popular in Islington, I can assure you that the other 99% of the UK have total respect for OUR Queen.

On deception and/or cock-ups

Why does the 大象传媒 allow another deception on "The Apprentice" that the winner from the two finalists on the programme gets chosen based solely on the programme and not as it really happens, after they both work for SIX MONTHS with Alan Sugar first??!!!

Then on "cock-ups" I still don't understand how the "decision" was made to pull the plug on Tony Blair at his final PMQs. I mean someone at the level where they have the authority to make the decision....what was the thought process???!!! please just give us a simple explanation.

Cock-up, conspiracy or palace wobbly, why are we subjected to such lengthy coverage of an non-issue. It is very boring. Spend our licence money on something more educational or entertaining please.

Talking about the Queen on Newsnight, 大象传媒 Controller Peter Fincham seemed to be telling Gavin Esler that it doesn't matter if you misrepresent reality to journalists as long as you get it right for the viewers. Such a flexible approach to reality in the Controller of 大象传媒 1 is frightening. Heaven help the 大象传媒!

3 programmes on cambell sums up for me why I will have to go to jail I will not pay for this **** brown bull**** corp

When a military coup occurs it is common practice to take over the TV station. In Nu-Britain things are done with much more subtlety. We are led to believe that the 大象传媒 is a leftist-leaning organisation and a thorn in the side of the establishment. In reality it is the mouthpiece and the shield of the establishment. He who pays the piper... or in this case, sets the licence fee.

What was Newsnight thinking of in having the Gavin Esler interview with Peter Fincham, 大象传媒1 Controller, about offending the queen, embarrassing the queen, having to apologise to the queen, and the numerous other times and ways that Esler strung out an interview that went on and on and on and on and on in its deferential way? Was there no news tonight? Were there no other items in stock that could have been used, rather than pad out the programme in this way?

Dear 大象传媒,

I Think you should Ban The Blue Peter Programme or Re Move it from bbc-1. The 大象传媒 is to big for its boots for what we pay for the TV-Fee-ETC,
Yours John

I agree with previous comment about the Queen. Are we to believe that she stormed INTO the shoot, complaining that she would not change anything BEFORE she had been asked? I smell a cover up- watch this space!

The controller of 大象传媒1 has just stated on Newsnight that the misleading Queen footage was "not broadcast" and "only shown to select journalists", when in fact it was broadcast on 大象传媒 News on Wednesday in a trailer on their Autumn programme line-up!

Having watched the Controller of Programmes being interviewed, it's easy to understand why the 大象传媒 gets in such a mess. What a totally unimpressive bloke and how absolutely flabergasting that the world's leading media organisation thinks it's okay to show things to journalists, but not to the public! This guy works in media and he doesn't know what they'll pick up on?

Also, we're expected to believe that for a major pr launch for their autumn programmes, nobody had even looked at the tape they were going to show? Come of it. And if he didn't know what was on it, how come he was briefing journalists about the Queen being in a strop? This guy, and all his press office, should be sacked for total and utter incompetence.

Dear Newsnight

sorry to say this but I'm appalled by the Queen non -story. What does it say about all of us that this even gets a mention, it was a mistake, it happens -SO WHAT ?

and I thought it was an unfortunate question to ask someone if they should resign, easily said in our rotten society where this seems to be the norm

the person concerned loses his livelihood -for what

does anyone out there understand what all this represents? the malaise, the decay,

this story DOES NOT deserve a mention,
if you wanted to look at it the Queen looked cross, again so what, all that happened is that a film was not run in sequence

what are the consequences and results of overplaying all this?

the 大象传媒 has its confidence knocked, some would like that, people become nervous, how does that play out

in the wider media, the constant tearing people down continues, what does that do to all of us and to the people and organisations concerned

and what happens to the thousands that have suffered or died around the globe whose chance of any mention in the news was pushed out by this rubbish

sorry you are way of the mark on this

tell the critics to get stuffed an assure Mr Fincham and the rest involved that their jobs are safe and get on with what you are meant to be doing
Bob

Many of us have said time and again that 大象传媒 does not report the news accurately or fairly but skews its reports to conform to the prejudices of its reporters and managers. Up until now, 大象传媒 has shrugged its shoulders and just ignored it all. But now the Queen of England herself has said the same and this time 大象传媒 has taken notice. 大象传媒, how about going back to the countless times you've done the same with far more important stories and apologize to the audience at large with a mea culpa and not just to the Queen you've offended. And while you're at it, how about coming up with policies that don't lead to this kind of journalistic crime against the news.

I still want to know why, if no one had raised the matter beforehand, the Queen was coming *in* to the shoot, obviously annoyed, and complaining she wasn't going to change anything.

After all the hours of broadcasting devoted to this incident no one has left me any the wiser on that point.

And I think it's an important one to address.

Dear Newsnight

I've just heard an "anonymous" email read out on 大象传媒 radio by someone who says they are a 大象传媒 journalist, saying some pretty unpleasant things about the 大象传媒.

But how do you know this 'anonymous message' is actually from one of your own journalists and not from someone who doesnt like you and perhaps works for someone else?

Bob

The 大象传媒 has now made a new batch of enemies (monarchists), right across the country, over the row with the queen. It wasn't as if some important news had been uncovered about the the royal family that we should all know about but that the queen has a bit of a temper. But not just this but that it appears that the sequence of events was fabricated to make the story even better. Can i just remind people that the 大象传媒 is paid for by the public to make programmes of integreity (as well as creativity and innovation).
Something like this could only happen, in my view, if there was already a self-publicity policy in place that was aggressive (as opposed to moderate) in nature. The sort of policy of a commercial broadcaster (as opposed to the sort of policy that a publically-funded broadcaster should have). When the 大象传媒 should really be focusing on the integrity of their content in such cases. So i don't believe this could just be a one-off but is something based on policy and management. I don't believe heads should fall but i certainly believe that the 大象传媒, in light of other, recent events, needs to take a good, hard look at itslef, and remember why it exists and what it stands for.
Finally. Has the 大象传媒 really changed since the Vanessa Feltz debacle - and its obsession with sensationalism, short-term popularity and ratings? At the cost of long-term respect and loyalty? Come on, this is a no brainer.
As a massive supporter of the idea of a publically-funded national braodcaster (that we call the 大象传媒 - but that some in the 大象传媒 seem to take for granted) i really hope that the 大象传媒 wakes up and gets real.

Scrap the licence fee, scrap the 大象传媒. Why should I have to pay to listen to political propanganda under the guise of "impartiality". Get rid of the lot of them.

That report on Turkey last night was a bit mental.

The secularists are so not the right people to run even a sunday fair never mind a country. And the Turkish military are all your worst nightmares come to life.

I dont care how long that journalist has been in the middle east, he doesnt know squat about Turkey - he made the AK party sound like the taliban and the secular parties came across like the Women's Institute or the Liberal Democrats. The political scene in Turkey is so much more sophisticated than the trite, two dimensional caricature that was presented last night.

there is no such thing as bad publicity?

As the old story goes that explains the difference between promotion, advertising, publicity, public relations and marketing.

When the circus comes to town and the elephants walk down the street that is promotion, when the posters go up in the shops that is advertising, if the elephants trample the mayors rose garden that's publicity, if you can get the Mayor to laugh about it that's public relations and if you planned it all that's marketing.

So in this case the only box that was not ticked was public relations -getting people to laugh about it which means it was not planned and thus we cannot assume this was a marketing exercise?

The 大象传媒 has its problems but it MUST NOT be scrapped! Have you seen the inane rubbish put out by the commercial channels punctuated but even more inane commercials?

While the impartiality of the 大象传媒 is under hot debate, it's perhaps worthy of note that while any perceived left wing bias anywhere on the 大象传媒 provokes frenzied jumping up and down by commentators, Newsnight's 'Broken Society' having been lifted from the Tories new touchy feely agenda (or vice versa) hasn't prompted the smallest skip.
Isn't it equally open to misinterpretation?

It was good to see the inestimable Tim Whewell back, presenting a typically illluminating analysis of the tumltuous political scene in Turkey. An elegantly put together package on the political and religious forces at work, with the army waiting in the wings. Kayseri was a particularly well-chosen case study. And Tim seems to have a way with the scarfies.