´óÏó´«Ã½

...In 2003, I was fighting an internal battle to bring more balance to the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s coverage of immigration. I felt that some of its reporters had been programmed to promote the benefits of cultural diversity as an incontrovertible fact.

Fed up with what he perceived to be my subversion, one of the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s most senior figures sent me an email: "The ´óÏó´«Ã½ internally is not neutral about multiculturalism. It believes in it and promotes diversity. Let's face up to that."

I was amazed that he felt unembarrassed to put this in a formal memo. It revealed an arrogant mindset at odds with millions of his customers...




is it right for the bbc to be a propagandist of a philosophy based on nihilism and moral relativism? Multiculturalism is a 'pig philosophy' because it does not believe there is such a thing as The Good and so refuses to discriminate between things to see which has the most good in them then rationally choose that which has most good and thus does not order them in preference .

So not all cultures are the same with respect to the Good. Not all cultures demonstrate an equal amount of good. So there is no equality among them and they can be graded as to how much of the Good they have in them.

So by promoting the idea that there is no such thing as the Good they are saying any choice is the same as any other and thus regardless of harm they might cause they are all equal.

Are all singers equal? Or are some better than others. Should we not grade them and then choose the best of them? Suppose there was no discrimination between karoke singer and trained opera singer. What kind of radio station would you have? A pretty unpleasent experience for the listener? And so the same with all things. There is an idea of The Good and it is rational to choose it. To prefer it.

Should this propagandising by the ´óÏó´«Ã½ of this ' pig philosophy' not be challenged? How do journalists feel about this? Are they 'signed up to the propagandising' to keep their jobs? How does that make them feel?

"I felt that some of its reporters had been programmed to promote the benefits of cultural diversity as an incontrovertible fact." says #1 bookhimdano.

Yes, bookhimdano, they are programmed. It is done by Common Purpose.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

3

it calls into question the bias and thus reliability on all reporting. the bbc would never have a topic on it so in effect it would never be raised. if the mods didn't think it was in the rules they would have deleted it?

Re #1. bookhimdano.
Holy cow! What a stunning post, all the more so because of its first hand nature. May I ask if I'm right in assuming that you're no longer with the ´óÏó´«Ã½, and if that is the case, how you came to leave ?

I've had to take a couple of days off work so have amused myself with writing jokes and checking out the bloggs. I have incorporated and reproduced the words of barrie, grumpy and others into monologues, then presented to a room full of strangers more than once this last fortnight, some verbatim, so will happily come on here to see if i can find any more quips or inspiration..am a worded line thief.

In this process, i found a rather terse response to @1 from @3 but has since gone astray.
What happened to Nickthornsby's post..
did he pull himself off..?? does Nick work for the ´óÏó´«Ã½ and self-censored himself, the cloud of Jack Danials and Coke waved away.. just in time to pull back on his critical thoughts, to save his skin perhaps..?
Am i now barred from here?

P:S jadedjean's links have been rather rewarding, i must be more observant of her posts and links in the future.

Post 1:
My view has always been that our right to freedom of speech was effectively stifled when 'discriminate' was made into a pejorative term.

Originally it was made illegal to practice UNFAIR discrimination, but we are now unable to discriminate or comment using our own discretion on many topics.

Discrimination is natural, desirable and essential for survival and progress.
I agree with bookhimdano that multicult was not progress in the right direction and future historians may see it as being one of the causes for the ongoing breakdown in our society. Can we ever get back to having a sense of national pride in our heritage?

Charles Wheeler was a legend, and I was very saddened by news of his death. He brought even the most inane topics to life. I often wonder if the charities, NGOs and even Government realise the powerful educational impact that the few like Charles Wheeler had: I am sure that many people took a greater interest in current and world affairs and obtained a greater appreciation of the problems and opportunities faced my people in so many other countries, and Charles Wheeler's unique style of research, presentation, reporting and obvious extraordinary professionalism contributued greatly to the public good. My condolences to his family, friends and colleagues in broacasting and Newsnight especially.

Doubtless, if I live long enough, I will pay a similar tribute to some of the other legends of newsnght, not least Jeremy Paxman.

However, can I highlight my frustration at the ´óÏó´«Ã½ Newsnight's new policy of denying non-UK online viewers access to past programs and long segments of current programs, such as the Zimbabwe report, which was "blocked" due to "copyright" reasons. I hope the ´óÏó´«Ã½ does something about this - the ´óÏó´«Ã½ is a global organisation, and it should do something to help its viewers who are being driven to YouTube in greater numbers, in order to see content.

However, back to Newsnight proper - what an excellent tribute to Charles Wheeler by the equally unique and brilliant Mr Paxman.

Re #6. They can't scratch you Cookie. Barrie wouldn't let them. You were bang-on in today's 'Prospects' IMO.
Re #3. Can you rephrase your with-held post Nick? Guessed you were adding to mancroft's point?

MUGABE'S NOT A NEOCON ?

I waited to see tonight's film before posting this in the hope that the piece would refute my ever growing scepticism over what appears to me to be predictably partisan coverage of the Zimbabwe/Mugabe/Zanu-PF saga - but sadly, it didn't, so just in case it hasn't sunk in, Mugabe has consistently said that having faught a war of independence he's not going to throw it all away for Western backed Social-Democracy (aka The New Left aka Trotskyism aka anarcho-capitalism) which was pretty much what he was fighting in the first place.

If any of that is unpalatable, please look closely into what's been said elsewhere in these blogs (and the archived ones) about the cynical abuse of equalitarianianism and Human Rights in sedition (usually by NGOs) to appreciate what I mean.

We don't see the EU or USA demanding that China has Social-Democratic opposition parties, adopts a Social-Democratic constitution and runs 'free and fair' elections, but then, we don't see China importing millions of low ability future 'voters' to shore up her dysgenic economy either. On the contrary, they appear to be going from strength to strength.

The cognoscenti familiar with what's been said in these blogs over the past year or so know what I'm referring to, and how NGO's promotion of 'democacy' and Human Rights isn't the panacea they make out (quite the contrary).

To improve their lot, 'despotic' Sub-Sahara African leaders need one-party systems, and they need to be able to ring-fence their populations if they're ever going to get to grips with the problems which they face as a consequence of their low mean 'human capital'.

But Western Social-Democrats don't REALLY want that to happen as the more 'democratic' these African countries are, the easier it is for the 'us to 'trade' with them.

I'd like to see Newsnight present the other perspective - i.e how about presenting the Chinese advisors' case? Then your viewers might be in a better position to understand what's for the best instead of what appears to be repeat doses of Social-Democatic (SI) propaganda. If it isn't Zimbabwe which is being vilified, it's N Korea or Uzbekistan, although at least the Policy Exchange type Islamophobia (which used to dominate the programme) has gone into remission.

Why do I think nothing much will change?

Shame no mention of the death of RSC Actress Elizabeth Spriggs who served the ´óÏó´«Ã½ TV and Radio very well !

No quote from Mark Thompson

#Bookhimdano

Just read your interesting posting, albeit late in the day. Basically, in my humble opinion, the multiculturalism the ´óÏó´«Ã½ promotes, acclaims and protects, is a political stance without any depth of sincerity. The ´óÏó´«Ã½ can be very "racist" if it is politically acceptable, defending dictators and condemning innocent people trying to defend their lives and lands. Unfortunately, the laws against racism and homophobia have muzzled free speech, and it is impossible to have an honest and open discussion. Try having a posting on HYS, a rather intellectually low level discussion forum, and if it isn't to their accepted stance, they will either reject it, or only place it on board minutes before debate is closed.

Oh dear. Because I didn't think a post was relevant in any way to this blog, or the programme and I said so, it has been reported and deleted. What a joke!