FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

BBC - Director General

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Was George Entwhistle right to resign? He was in post for 54 days. Has he been made a capegoat for previous administrations mistakes. he goes with a pension of circ £100k per tear and an undisclosed golden goodbye.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

They are all tossers and should all be sacked !!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

think it was inevitable tbh..

given the shambles of the newsnight article re alledged paedophiles etc..

would have probably been sacked by the BBC board..

not sure what relevance it is about his pension and how long he 'was in post'..

thats his contract..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

People who willingly take on the responsibility and rewards of sitting in the big chair must ultimately be held accountable for their actions and inaction’s…

However in saying that, in this case it seems a bit of shame because he didn't have long in the top job and given time I’m sure he was the right man to turn things around in the BBC….

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment"
The BBC was created when the establishment didnt quite understand how the TV thing would develop.

Having been inolved in the move to Salford I know only too well how inefficent this organisation is and how poorly its managed. The funding of the BBC is unique as it gets given a billion pounds per annum without really any effort.

Is the answer to deregulate it and let the market decide on whether its a national treasure or an antiquated outdated and an irrelevance?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment"

disagree with removing the licence fee..

not everyone wants to have to pay murdoch for what is still a second rate service compared to the beeb (on sport sky are ahead)..

they need a shake up at management and oversight level, Patton pretty much said thats what is needed on Marr's programme earlier..

There have been some stupid decisions taken and other's not taken which should have been done..

not yet sunk to the vile depth's of NI yet though..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment"
Well said.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment

disagree with removing the licence fee..

not everyone wants to have to pay murdoch for what is still a second rate service compared to the beeb (on sport sky are ahead)..

they need a shake up at management and oversight level, Patton pretty much said thats what is needed on Marr's programme earlier..

There have been some stupid decisions taken and other's not taken which should have been done..

not yet sunk to the vile depth's of NI yet though..

"

The M word!!!! probably the best reason to keep the dear Old Aunt and get her a makeover!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment Well said. "

Agreed. Scrap the licence fee, let the Beeb keep the cash it has already and let it sink or swim on it's own.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment Well said.

Agreed. Scrap the licence fee, let the Beeb keep the cash it has already and let it sink or swim on it's own. "
The voices of reasoned moderation.......

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

not everyone wants to have to pay murdoch for what is still a second rate service compared to the beeb (on sport sky are ahead)..

"

Let them get their revenue through advertising, ITV does it. The BBC will only float if the programmes they make are worth watching. The BBC used to have high production values and were seen as a beacon for good programming, but that has not been the case for a long time. Apart from their Natural History dep't, the rest of the programming is not much different across the differnent broadcasters

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Let them get their revenue through advertising, ITV does it. The BBC will only float if the programmes they make are worth watching. The BBC used to have high production values and were seen as a beacon for good programming, but that has not been the case for a long time. Apart from their Natural History dep't, the rest of the programming is not much different across the differnent broadcasters"

If the BBC went down the advertising route, ITV, Five and Channel 4 would be up in arms. If they went for subscription you can bet your last penny Murdoch would be crying foul.

I think George Entwistle was putting in place a much better structure in the BBC, giving actual programme-makers the power that producers and bureaucrats had taken from them but sadly he has proved pretty useless on this issue.

For those who are dancing on the BBC's grave, how do you feel about the Sun peddling a lie about the Hillsborough victims for 20 years. Did Murdoch resign?

Christopher Jefferies was horrendously libeled by the Sun, the Daily Mirror, the Sunday Mirror, the Daily Mail, the Daily Record, the Daily Express, the Daily Star and the Scotsman.

Did any of the managing editors of the newspapers resign?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"For those who are dancing on the BBC's grave, how do you feel about the Sun peddling a lie about the Hillsborough victims for 20 years. Did Murdoch resign?

Christopher Jefferies was horrendously libeled by the Sun, the Daily Mirror, the Sunday Mirror, the Daily Mail, the Daily Record, the Daily Express, the Daily Star and the Scotsman.

Did any of the managing editors of the newspapers resign?

"

Which is the precise point. If the BBC want to make unfounded accusations against people, or even tell outright blatant lies, and keep it's heads of staff in place then let it compete on a level playing field with it's competitors.

However, if the BBC continues to take taxpayers cash, of which Lord McAlpine is one, then it must adhere to the guidlelines set out for it and provide unbiased and accurate reporting. If it doesn't then the Director General must resign as the buck stops with him. Having said that, with such ridigity of structure in place it doesn't take a genius to work out that if the head of current affairs has a bone to grind with his boss, the DG, all he has to do to make him fall on his sword is use a programme like Newsnight to pump out inaccurate information.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Give me the job!

Eastenders would vanish overnight along with every bollocks reality show - and the money used to great effect with more topical, factual and relevant indepth features and events - on Top Gear!

Like how many ppi claims telesales staff can you fit in a mini before rocket launching it into the south Atlantic!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Give me the job!

Eastenders would vanish overnight along with every bollocks reality show - and the money used to great effect with more topical, factual and relevant indepth features and events - on Top Gear!

Like how many ppi claims telesales staff can you fit in a mini before rocket launching it into the south Atlantic! "

If you get rid of eastenders and Strictly, you have my vote

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

I don't think it is the case of him being in the big chair as to why he had to go... it was the case that he was head of the news dept at the time of the alledged newsnight piece was dropped.... and then couldn't get his story straight as to why it was dropped.....

remember that the bbc is bigger than just saville... and whoever sits in the big chair hopefully will see that

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment Well said.

Agreed. Scrap the licence fee, let the Beeb keep the cash it has already and let it sink or swim on it's own. The voices of reasoned moderation....... "

absolutely disagree......

the BBC had a public service remit and the license fee protects that.... the licence fee doesn't just go towards popular programming...

shows like Top Gear and Dr Who for example may make them money.... but that money goes on for example....

local radio and TV programming

BBC children programming

BBC Natural History Unit

BBC Science Unit

and ect ect.....

remember also the license fee also goes toward Public service Programming on Channel 4... so how do you think they were able to get their paralympic coverage...

take away the licence fee and you turn BBC into ITV

and it the end you turn British TV into American TV... where it is all about rating and all entertainment..

you want to know who makes for example Seseme Street... its PBS.... which is subsidised by the Government....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment Well said.

Agreed. Scrap the licence fee, let the Beeb keep the cash it has already and let it sink or swim on it's own. The voices of reasoned moderation.......

absolutely disagree......

the BBC had a public service remit and the license fee protects that.... the licence fee doesn't just go towards popular programming...

shows like Top Gear and Dr Who for example may make them money.... but that money goes on for example....

local radio and TV programming

BBC children programming

BBC Natural History Unit

BBC Science Unit

and ect ect.....

remember also the license fee also goes toward Public service Programming on Channel 4... so how do you think they were able to get their paralympic coverage...

take away the licence fee and you turn BBC into ITV

and it the end you turn British TV into American TV... where it is all about rating and all entertainment..

you want to know who makes for example Seseme Street... its PBS.... which is subsidised by the Government...."

Well said. Despite it's problems it is still the best in the world

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eavenNhellCouple
over a year ago

carrbrook stalybridge

So the Murdoch press have thier pound of flesh

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Thankfully there are some wonderfully brave journalism professionals out there like Paul Dacre who will not resign no matter how much they get wrong, or how many false accusations they make.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *tickyfingers.24Man
over a year ago

Newport Pagnell

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs


"

not everyone wants to have to pay murdoch for what is still a second rate service compared to the beeb (on sport sky are ahead)..

Let them get their revenue through advertising, ITV does it. The BBC will only float if the programmes they make are worth watching. The BBC used to have high production values and were seen as a beacon for good programming, but that has not been the case for a long time. Apart from their Natural History dep't, the rest of the programming is not much different across the differnent broadcasters"

No f'in way! One of the best things about the BBC is no adverts!

There isn't a single prog on ITV that I watch live, record the all and forward through the adds! Hate adverts with a passion. Volume goes up and wastes my time!

The outrageously bad handling of this situations reflects badly on the senior management and the lawyers used but isn't a true reflection of the excellent programming and content of everything else it does.

It's coverage of sport eg Olympics for one was excellent!

It's nature and light comedy is outstanding. Drama are without doubt the best.

Downton Abbey is 40 mins long taking the ads out so you get a full hour with BBC productions. Nothing worse than getting into a story line and then some inane perfume advert!

I fully enjoy lots of different progs on sky and all its channels who are only there largely showing reruns of BBC progs, but again record and watch later without ads..where would Dave be without Sunday nights best prog Top Gear....

Newsnight has lost it's way and to be honest it's way to up itself; so if it went who'd miss it? I wouldn't.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

There does seem to be quite a lot of wastage at the BBC.

Recently there was a news story about Scotland's future in or out of NATO. It was covered UK wide and in Scotland. It was also covered on the political channel and on Radio 4 and Radio Scotland.

Each channel and station seemed to have sent their own correspondent to a hillside overlooking Faslane. I don't know whether each brought their own camera/ sound crew.

Does it really take half-a-dozen different people to tell the same story?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andy andy69Man
over a year ago

worksop ish

So what peeps are saying is that as head of the bbc he should know what is happening in every department !!! Rubbish with a capital R

He can't know and nor should he, that's why he has unnit head, dept heads etc etc, its them that should be going !!!

However as a man of honour, fair play to the old boy !!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xscotMan
over a year ago

Kingston

here is a point - the Beeb cost you less than £3 per week for all of the channels TV and Radio - without adverts - they provide the widest range of programmes of any broadcaster in the world (you cant please all of the people all of the time) Sky cost for the basic - poorer than the BBC package is £5 per week

also note Sky made a profit last year of £1Billion your subs plus adverts

who are the poor saps now

Yes the Beeb needs to change but the people making the noise just now have vested interests in reducing its power

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

i think some mp's need to look at what the DG of the bbc has done.

this country has been dragged through th mud by people in high places acting disgracefully in public and using power to achieve financil rewards at the tax payers expense.

One Mp expenses scandal after another which shows any rules we let these appointed public servants make relating to expenses are not in our interests.

we have the nhs covered in red tape and now police commissioners who are just not really needed.Front line police are!

Companies getting away from paying little or no taxes and the real issue of that is you and me have to find the money because they do not pay.

These people of power back each other up and contiune to act like we are nobodies in a banana republic.

you may thing im going into one but understand we are all damaged by these people in some way.

The bbc DG has resigned with honor and most of the mp's should have done the same because they have failed in their duty to represent us correctly.

Sadly for the bbc television has moved on and people have a wider choice.it is no longer the company people trust for news and current affairs.

Is something radical needed? i cannot answer that because what can the bbc really do in the face of competition which do a better job?

i think the only bbc channel i watch is the news channel because you can view it online.

how many people will give to children in need this year after the savile exposure considering he was employed by the bbc?.

i know that the money helps children who need it but who helped them when savile was doing his evil deeds?

its a serious question and this is not the first time the bbc has found itself in trouble (remember the dr david kelly affair).

it is a very sad time. we cannot trust leaders to be honest and above suspicion.

Cia man goes for affair,lockheed martin president goes after affair and so on.

These are very high powered people and people who wage war and build weapons.

and the bbc tells the news. incorrectly.

so who can you trust?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs


"There does seem to be quite a lot of wastage at the BBC.

Recently there was a news story about Scotland's future in or out of NATO. It was covered UK wide and in Scotland. It was also covered on the political channel and on Radio 4 and Radio Scotland.

Each channel and station seemed to have sent their own correspondent to a hillside overlooking Faslane. I don't know whether each brought their own camera/ sound crew.

Does it really take half-a-dozen different people to tell the same story?"

Sadly we don't all listen to the world service any more so they have to cater for all the channels and those used by their viewers or listeners.

There is a channel which has appeared on virgin called BBC Alba which caters for viewers in Gaelic. Hope that sheds a little light as to why

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs


"So what peeps are saying is that as head of the bbc he should know what is happening in every department !!! Rubbish with a capital R

He can't know and nor should he, that's why he has unnit head, dept heads etc etc, its them that should be going !!!

However as a man of honour, fair play to the old boy !!!"

Whilst I understand your sentiment regarding all depts this was to big a story for him to have no knowledge, especially considering Saville.

But I would also question and look to remove all those that helped in making the decision including the lawyers who must also have advised to go ahead.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

What about making Andrew Marr DG ?

There is something so compelling about him - and he knows how to ask awkward questions !

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs


"What about making Andrew Marr DG ?

There is something so compelling about him - and he knows how to ask awkward questions !"

And he knows all about super injunctions and how to use them too!!

He seems a little hypocritical as a journalist

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"So what peeps are saying is that as head of the bbc he should know what is happening in every department !!! Rubbish with a capital R

He can't know and nor should he, that's why he has unnit head, dept heads etc etc, its them that should be going !!!

However as a man of honour, fair play to the old boy !!!"

would agree in general on a 'normal day,week or month'..

but with what was happening post the disclosure about not running the saville story on Newsnight, and the removal on gardening leave of certain managers etc..

he should have set in place a belts and braces approach about the latest paedophilia allegations, to have not done so is incompetent to the nth degree..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"There does seem to be quite a lot of wastage at the BBC.

Recently there was a news story about Scotland's future in or out of NATO. It was covered UK wide and in Scotland. It was also covered on the political channel and on Radio 4 and Radio Scotland.

Each channel and station seemed to have sent their own correspondent to a hillside overlooking Faslane. I don't know whether each brought their own camera/ sound crew.

Does it really take half-a-dozen different people to tell the same story?

Sadly we don't all listen to the world service any more so they have to cater for all the channels and those used by their viewers or listeners.

There is a channel which has appeared on virgin called BBC Alba which caters for viewers in Gaelic. Hope that sheds a little light as to why

"

I don't object to the story being on as many channels as possible. I'm just not sure each different channel needs a different presenter to read the same script.

Don't get me started on BBC Alba.

In order to get Alba on Freeview, the BBC sacrificed most of their Freeview radio channels from 17.00 - 00.00 7 days a week - including Radio nan Gaidheal which was ALL Gaelic whilst BBC Alba is about 25% Gaelic, 75% repeats and 95% crap.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

the out going director general is getting £450,000 for resigning after 52 days in the job.

good work if you can get it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

It seems Chris Patten is in negotiations to hand the BBC over to the Chinese government.

When asked why, he explained that it had worked out well for him with Hong Kong.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"the out going director general is getting £450,000 for resigning after 52 days in the job.

good work if you can get it."

Unbelievable!!! How many TV Licences does that work out at???

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"the out going director general is getting £450,000 for resigning after 52 days in the job.

good work if you can get it.

Unbelievable!!! How many TV Licences does that work out at??? "

3,092.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"the out going director general is getting £450,000 for resigning after 52 days in the job.

good work if you can get it.

Unbelievable!!! How many TV Licences does that work out at???

3,092."
How do you arrive at that figure?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"the out going director general is getting £450,000 for resigning after 52 days in the job.

good work if you can get it.

Unbelievable!!! How many TV Licences does that work out at???

3,092.How do you arrive at that figure?"

£450,000 / £145.50

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"the out going director general is getting £450,000 for resigning after 52 days in the job.

good work if you can get it.

Unbelievable!!! How many TV Licences does that work out at???

3,092.How do you arrive at that figure?

£450,000 / £145.50"
I had no idea how much the Licence cost!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xscotMan
over a year ago

Kingston


"the out going director general is getting £450,000 for resigning after 52 days in the job.

good work if you can get it.

Unbelievable!!! How many TV Licences does that work out at???

3,092.How do you arrive at that figure?

£450,000 / £145.50 I had no idea how much the Licence cost!"

I mentioned earlier that it cost less than £3 per week - a simple bit of multiplication gets you to £150

how much do you pay for your Sky subscription?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Was George Entwhistle right to resign? He was in post for 54 days. Has he been made a capegoat for previous administrations mistakes. he goes with a pension of circ £100k per tear and an undisclosed golden goodbye."

Did he jump, was he pushed, could he cope?

Which ever he is the fall guy but it sounds like a good pension he will be getting but is it all due to his 54 days or partially due to his previous positions?

I only know snippets on his payout and circumstances so wouldn't like to say if he deserved it or not,

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

His pension will reflect his previous 23 years at the BBC.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

I'm still trying to work out what Entwistle did wrong.

It seems some guy on Newsnight claimed he'd been abused by a 'senior conservative politician' and the Twittersphere went mental and named McAlpine.

Nobody condones naming and shaming, especially on Fab, but there doesn't seem to have been any actual naming on Newsnight.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I'm still trying to work out what Entwistle did wrong.

It seems some guy on Newsnight claimed he'd been abused by a 'senior conservative politician' and the Twittersphere went mental and named McAlpine.

Nobody condones naming and shaming, especially on Fab, but there doesn't seem to have been any actual naming on Newsnight."

Entwistle was in charge of BBC Vision when the Savile story broke - or didn't break on the BBC as it happens because it was supressed on his watch as Director of BBC Vision. He knew about the Savile Panorama report in 2011 and he did not ask Helen Boaden for further details. The Newsnight investigation into Savile was then dropped.

His payout of £450,000 was written into his contract that if he was sacked he would recieve a year's salary in lieu of notice. If he resigned he was entitled to 6 months salary but to expedite his resignation it was agreed he would receive the full year's salary to save both the BBC and himself the embarrassment of sacking the BBC Director General.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"I'm still trying to work out what Entwistle did wrong.

It seems some guy on Newsnight claimed he'd been abused by a 'senior conservative politician' and the Twittersphere went mental and named McAlpine.

Nobody condones naming and shaming, especially on Fab, but there doesn't seem to have been any actual naming on Newsnight.

Entwistle was in charge of BBC Vision when the Savile story broke - or didn't break on the BBC as it happens because it was supressed on his watch as Director of BBC Vision. He knew about the Savile Panorama report in 2011 and he did not ask Helen Boaden for further details. The Newsnight investigation into Savile was then dropped.

His payout of £450,000 was written into his contract that if he was sacked he would recieve a year's salary in lieu of notice. If he resigned he was entitled to 6 months salary but to expedite his resignation it was agreed he would receive the full year's salary to save both the BBC and himself the embarrassment of sacking the BBC Director General."

well that worked then didnt it lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"the out going director general is getting £450,000 for resigning after 52 days in the job.

good work if you can get it.

Unbelievable!!! How many TV Licences does that work out at???

3,092.How do you arrive at that figure?

£450,000 / £145.50 I had no idea how much the Licence cost!

I mentioned earlier that it cost less than £3 per week - a simple bit of multiplication gets you to £150

how much do you pay for your Sky subscription?"

£60/month but we get considerably more than the dozen or so channels the BBC produce, and we get to record them and watch them when it's convenient for us.

I wouldn't miss the BBC in it's current guise as I rarely watch BBC programmes anyway (although Siren does watch the BBC).

I think it's time has run as a national broadcasting company and that it should compete on a level playing field along with it's competitors and devoid of public cash.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs


"I'm still trying to work out what Entwistle did wrong.

It seems some guy on Newsnight claimed he'd been abused by a 'senior conservative politician' and the Twittersphere went mental and named McAlpine.

Nobody condones naming and shaming, especially on Fab, but there doesn't seem to have been any actual naming on Newsnight.

Entwistle was in charge of BBC Vision when the Savile story broke - or didn't break on the BBC as it happens because it was supressed on his watch as Director of BBC Vision. He knew about the Savile Panorama report in 2011 and he did not ask Helen Boaden for further details. The Newsnight investigation into Savile was then dropped.

His payout of £450,000 was written into his contract that if he was sacked he would recieve a year's salary in lieu of notice. If he resigned he was entitled to 6 months salary but to expedite his resignation it was agreed he would receive the full year's salary to save both the BBC and himself the embarrassment of sacking the BBC Director General.

well that worked then didnt it lol"

And to gtee his help in the forthcoming investigation!

Disgraceful!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The world of big business is vastly different to the smalltime jobs 99% of the population hold. Someone has to run the BBC and whoever they pick can broker whatever deal he can get for himself. He (or she) is of significant experience to hold the post of DG and is held in high regard, but that person also knows how subject he or she is to the slings and arrows of misfortune and to counterbalance that they negotiate golden handshakes to cushion the blow of suddenly being without an income (but they're already rich!, I hear the green folk muttering), and yes they are wealthy, but they live a lifestyle that requires them to earn at a certain level continously (the same as you and I have to, to service our mortgages).

Either way you look at Mr Entwistle, he was going to get £450k as a payout because if he held out and refused to resign unless he got the £450k he would have been sacked and still got it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"

I think it's time has run as a national broadcasting company and that it should compete on a level playing field along with it's competitors and devoid of public cash."

sorry.. but thats rubbish...

and like I said above which a lot of the people who put this stuff forward never answer the that a ton of the stuff which the BBC is known for and admirered around the world for wouldn't make a profie and therefore would never be made.....

you would turn the BBC into ITV, this would be the same ITV almost devoid on anything local, the same channel that slashed it local budgets and merged its local news services...

you think the bbc natural history unit for example makes money... or the bbc childrens unit?.....

some people forget that the BBC is more that just BBC1....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"I'm still trying to work out what Entwistle did wrong.

It seems some guy on Newsnight claimed he'd been abused by a 'senior conservative politician' and the Twittersphere went mental and named McAlpine.

Nobody condones naming and shaming, especially on Fab, but there doesn't seem to have been any actual naming on Newsnight.

Entwistle was in charge of BBC Vision when the Savile story broke - or didn't break on the BBC as it happens because it was supressed on his watch as Director of BBC Vision. He knew about the Savile Panorama report in 2011 and he did not ask Helen Boaden for further details. The Newsnight investigation into Savile was then dropped.

His payout of £450,000 was written into his contract that if he was sacked he would recieve a year's salary in lieu of notice. If he resigned he was entitled to 6 months salary but to expedite his resignation it was agreed he would receive the full year's salary to save both the BBC and himself the embarrassment of sacking the BBC Director General."

Whilst every word you post is correct - none of it has anything to do with Entwistle's alleged culpability in 'naming and shaming' a senior conservative politician.

I'm not unhappy with the belief he's responsible for everything that happens at the BBC - big salary brings big responsibility - but, as far as I can see, nobody at the BBC named McAlpine.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I'm still trying to work out what Entwistle did wrong.

It seems some guy on Newsnight claimed he'd been abused by a 'senior conservative politician' and the Twittersphere went mental and named McAlpine.

Nobody condones naming and shaming, especially on Fab, but there doesn't seem to have been any actual naming on Newsnight.

Entwistle was in charge of BBC Vision when the Savile story broke - or didn't break on the BBC as it happens because it was supressed on his watch as Director of BBC Vision. He knew about the Savile Panorama report in 2011 and he did not ask Helen Boaden for further details. The Newsnight investigation into Savile was then dropped.

His payout of £450,000 was written into his contract that if he was sacked he would recieve a year's salary in lieu of notice. If he resigned he was entitled to 6 months salary but to expedite his resignation it was agreed he would receive the full year's salary to save both the BBC and himself the embarrassment of sacking the BBC Director General.

Whilst every word you post is correct - none of it has anything to do with Entwistle's alleged culpability in 'naming and shaming' a senior conservative politician.

I'm not unhappy with the belief he's responsible for everything that happens at the BBC - big salary brings big responsibility - but, as far as I can see, nobody at the BBC named McAlpine."

It was the Newsnight report that led to internet/twitternet gossip that led to McAlpine being named. Had the programme not gone out - as it shouldn't have - McAlpine wouldn't have been forced to issue a statement publicly denying being the 'senior Tory' who molested young boys in Wales.

I'm not saying that young boys in Wales weren't molested but there was some serious misreporting conducted by Newsnight who should have at the very least asked the police if McAlpine was the man identified by the victim. The police could have easily cleared up any confusion and the programme would have been canned, or adjusted so that it didn't mention a senior Tory at all. Newsnight put that programme out believing McAlpine was the man who molested boys.

Entwistle was in charge of the BBC and the buck stopped with him. I agree that he cannot possibly know everything that goes on in such a vast corporation but on the issue of accusing well known political figures of child molestation he should have been informed and had the final say.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

I heard nothing in the programme which suggested the abuser was McAlpine, just that it was a senior conservative politician.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

* edit.. insinuating well known political figures

(there must have been enough information put out for people to put two and two together and come up with McAlpine.)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment"

My hubby speaks German and he was just watching German news - they are laughing themselves daft about the mess at the BBC. Think serves them right! for years they have been bashing others sometimes without reason at all. Hope this MacAlpin bloke sues them and all others to stop this hunting people of the net just because someone starts a rumor... and it might get us back serious news reporting if they are sued to an inch of their lives

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


".........Entwistle was in charge of the BBC and the buck stopped with him. I agree that he cannot possibly know everything that goes on in such a vast corporation but on the issue of accusing well known political figures of child molestation he should have been informed and had the final say."

If we're going to apply this strict culpability to the BBC, shouldn't was also apply it in government?

What happened to ministerial responsibility, where the Secretary of State was responsible for every action of every employee in his department, whether s/he could reasonably have forseen what that employee might do?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"* edit.. insinuating well known political figures

(there must have been enough information put out for people to put two and two together and come up with McAlpine.)"

It would seem there was but the problems are

1) it wasn't Newsnight which put two and two together and

2) whoever DID put two and two together got it wrong (it seems).

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"The BBC are headed up a bunch of left wing, old school tie numpties. Entwistle seemed out of his depth. The whole of the BBC needs a shake up, the licence fee to go and them left to stand on their own feet. Auntie Beeb is fast becoming a national embarrassment

My hubby speaks German and he was just watching German news - they are laughing themselves daft about the mess at the BBC. Think serves them right! for years they have been bashing others sometimes without reason at all. Hope this MacAlpin bloke sues them and all others to stop this hunting people of the net just because someone starts a rumor... and it might get us back serious news reporting if they are sued to an inch of their lives "

Who is McAlpine going to sue?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


".........Entwistle was in charge of the BBC and the buck stopped with him. I agree that he cannot possibly know everything that goes on in such a vast corporation but on the issue of accusing well known political figures of child molestation he should have been informed and had the final say.

If we're going to apply this strict culpability to the BBC, shouldn't was also apply it in government?

What happened to ministerial responsibility, where the Secretary of State was responsible for every action of every employee in his department, whether s/he could reasonably have forseen what that employee might do?

"

It has nothing to do with foresight. The BBC should have had procedures in place whereby if allegations are going to be made against senior politicans (or any other high profile individual or organisation) then the Director General should know about and be involved in the decision making process at the very highest level.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

Who mentioned foresight?

I agree that, had Newsnight made allegations against McAlpine, it ought to have been cleared at the highest level but Newsnight didn't make allegations about any named person.

If I post here saying 'a senior member of Fab is a timewaster 'cos he didn't show up last night', I've done nothing wrong.

If I post saying, 'name of individual, is a timewaster 'cos he didn't show up last night' I'd expect to be in soapy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Who mentioned foresight?"

You did: "whether s/he could reasonably have forseen what that employee might do"


"

I agree that, had Newsnight made allegations against McAlpine, it ought to have been cleared at the highest level but Newsnight didn't make allegations about any named person.

If I post here saying 'a senior member of Fab is a timewaster 'cos he didn't show up last night', I've done nothing wrong.

If I post saying, 'name of individual, is a timewaster 'cos he didn't show up last night' I'd expect to be in soapy."

If you'd posted saying 'a member of Fab from Wrexham is a timeswaster cos he never turned up in his red coupe like he said he would' then you haven't named him but given quite a few pointers to his identity.

In the case of the Newsnight eposide broadcast on Nov 2 the producers didn't explictly name McAlpine but gave serious pointers as to where the individual's name at the centre of the abuse allegations could be found. Newsnight all *but* named McAlpine.

Let's not forget that it isn't just Jennii, 13 from Stoke Newington who use Twitter, but people who are professional dirt diggers and work for the secretive and shady aspects of all political parties, and they are tasked with finding mud to sling at their opponents and if they can't find any - make it up. McAlpine's name was known behind the scenes of Newsnight as the person named by Mr Messham and even though Newsnight didn't mention his name the previously mentioned dirt diggers knew were to look to find his name and then launch it on Twitter and let Twitternet do the rest.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

All *but* naming McAlpine is the same as all *but* pulling the trigger.

Nobody dies.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"All *but* naming McAlpine is the same as all *but* pulling the trigger.

Nobody dies."

It's not the same at all. Bad analogy. McAlpine had his name besmirched and some people like to believe their version of the truth no matter how much evidence to the contrary is presented before them.

The bottom line is that Entwistle was director of BBC Vision when the Savile story first broke and he was Director General when Newsnight broadcast about a 'senior Tory politician' molesting boys in Wales. Entwistle should have known about the Newsnight programme as he knew about McAlpine incorrectly in the frame for it in 2011.

I can't see how you're struggling with this so much.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

Nobody mentioned McAlpine's name on Newsnight so, whilst there's no doubt his name was besmirched, it wasn't on Newsnight.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 12/11/12 23:41:42]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Nobody mentioned McAlpine's name on Newsnight so, whilst there's no doubt his name was besmirched, it wasn't on Newsnight. "

We're going round in circles now. He wasn't named as in they didn't say, 'It was Lord McAlpine' but as I've tried to explain, enough info was given out so that people that knew how to look now knew where to start looking.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top