S&M, I did mean whilst I was at the BBC, not in normal life.
I forgot to include 'male' in my self-description.
It always seems like a strange comment. The primary role of a public broadcaster in a liberal democracy is to offer a platform to a variety of people and views. White, heterosexual males are in a fairly privileged position of being well represented in life, generally, so it would make sense for the BBC to have a different purview.
Whether or not they do is another matter. Given prominent positions going to vocal conservatives, I'm not sure you can say there's a danger of the BBC being beholden to the 'liberal-left' (whatever that means). For instance, it seems far happier to revel in Labour strife because, shock horror, people have different opinions on certain matters, than they are on reporting on the disgraceful showing of the Tories during a debate on a matter of sex equality (at one point, they only had 5 members on the benches).
I don't think you and jonlin have anything to worry about.
jonlin wrote:The BBC is run for and on the behalf of the Liberal left. You have interest in a sport that they see as elitist, attended by people with constructive opinions. You are not their audience.
jonlin wrote:The BBC is run for and on the behalf of the Liberal left. You have interest in a sport that they see as elitist, attended by people with constructive opinions. You are not their audience.
The thing I love about this discussion board is that it allows you to disagree!
Bang on Off Piste Tiger:
At least BBC Radio Leicester give The Tigers good coverage
BBC covered the entire game live on the radio! What more do you want?
As for it not appearing on the BBC sports news… well put yourself in the place of the BBC editor… you have FA Cup highlights, Mo Farah highlights and darts highlights to show or a caption with Tigers 30 Saints 27 on… what makes better telly?
I went to Cheltenham races on New Year's Day and that got virtually no TV news coverage and the attendance was 50,000+. Did it bother me… not a jot!
Oh yes… and people seem to have forgotten… England's home 6 Nations games are on ITV this year, so I'm not clear why people are suggesting some sort of 6 Nations BBC bias?
MrPartridge wrote:
Oh yes… and people seem to have forgotten… England's home 6 Nations games are on ITV this year, so I'm not clear why people are suggesting some sort of 6 Nations BBC bias?
Oh lord, I'd forgotten that too.
But to bring things back to my original point and to answer Mr P, my point was that a national sport that attracts good crowds should get more exposure from the BBC.
I would expect Radio Leicester to give the Club (and the cricket and the soccer) substantial support. If they won't, no one will.
BBC have been pathetic at sport since the London Olympics of 2012, they are so intent on holding on to star events such as the FA cup final, Wimbledon and the open golf that there has been little enough room for anything else and their coverage of winter sports such as my favourites as Ski jumping and Biathlon is a joke. Thank god I can view both Euro sport channels on my sky platform.
S&M, I did mean whilst I was at the BBC, not in normal life.
I forgot to include 'male' in my self-description.
It always seems like a strange comment. The primary role of a public broadcaster in a liberal democracy is to offer a platform to a variety of people and views. White, heterosexual males are in a fairly privileged position of being well represented in life, generally, so it would make sense for the BBC to have a different purview.
Whether or not they do is another matter. Given prominent positions going to vocal conservatives, I'm not sure you can say there's a danger of the BBC being beholden to the 'liberal-left' (whatever that means). For instance, it seems far happier to revel in Labour strife because, shock horror, people have different opinions on certain matters, than they are on reporting on the disgraceful showing of the Tories during a debate on a matter of sex equality (at one point, they only had 5 members on the benches).
I don't think you and jonlin have anything to worry about.
I would have thought that their remit was (or should be) to reflect the wishes of their licence payers and to deliver a reasonable level of coverage within the finances available to them. To favour one group over another is discriminatory. Rugby may be assumed to be elitist in parts of England but I would argue that there are probably more rugby fans in the East Mids than in Scotland and probably Wales interested in the Tigers:Saints match than any of the club fixtures that got TV mentions in Scotland or Wales news.
Just because the game was watched by predominantly middle aged men and women with no prejudices about whether they sit or stand next to someone of different sex or race, orientation without starting a fight if they support the opposing side doesn't mean that that a major sporting event should be ignored.
Skin_and_Muscle wrote:
It always seems like a strange comment. The primary role of a public broadcaster in a liberal democracy is to offer a platform to a variety of people and views. White, heterosexual males are in a fairly privileged position of being well represented in life, generally, so it would make sense for the BBC to have a different purview.
Whether or not they do is another matter. Given prominent positions going to vocal conservatives, I'm not sure you can say there's a danger of the BBC being beholden to the 'liberal-left' (whatever that means). For instance, it seems far happier to revel in Labour strife because, shock horror, people have different opinions on certain matters, than they are on reporting on the disgraceful showing of the Tories during a debate on a matter of sex equality (at one point, they only had 5 members on the benches).
I don't think you and jonlin have anything to worry about.
I would have thought that their remit was (or should be) to reflect the wishes of their licence payers and to deliver a reasonable level of coverage within the finances available to them. To favour one group over another is discriminatory. Rugby may be assumed to be elitist in parts of England but I would argue that there are probably more rugby fans in the East Mids than in Scotland and probably Wales interested in the Tigers:Saints match than any of the club fixtures that got TV mentions in Scotland or Wales news.
Just because the game was watched by predominantly middle aged men and women with no prejudices about whether they sit or stand next to someone of different sex or race, orientation without starting a fight if they support the opposing side doesn't mean that that a major sporting event should be ignored.
The point bleaklow made had a more general implication that distinguished it from the matter about rugby reporting. For what it's worth, I think it's strange not to have full sports coverage as all sport is, ultimately, equally trivial.
I guess people would just prefer the coverage to fall in line with popularity, which I must admit it appears not to in the national news. I'm guessing this would be skewed further still in the local regions such as the West Country and the East Midlands
Bleaklow wrote:I didn't see the news but I can understand your frustration. The BBC is going the same mardy way as Sky, i.e. if they're not covering it, they're not interested in it. They almost see it as advertising for the opposition if they report on something they don't have.
I've just watched the Tigers match again and noticed a very short post-match analysis and no chat with Cockers. This was obviously due to BT Sports being desperate to get to the blessed football asap. We could quite easily have kicked off at 3pm yesterday, had a 30 minute build-up on BT Sports as opposed to the 45 minutes we had and then there would have been sufficient time for a decent post mortem.
Rocket science? I don't think so.
However, just to provide a slight counter-argument (although I mostly agree with you) BT's rugby tonight programme at least mentions the scores in the Top14 and Pro12, neither of which they have any rights to. That show is also vastly superior to anything that Sky ever did and to me has a decent rugby 'feel' about it.
MrPartridge wrote:
Oh yes… and people seem to have forgotten… England's home 6 Nations games are on ITV this year, so I'm not clear why people are suggesting some sort of 6 Nations BBC bias?
) BBC no longer have the Open Golf.