Quite. Clarkson was sacked from Top Gear not for anything he said, but for assaulting a colleague. Cancel culture eh?!
-
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here
The BBC
- Thread starter The Proper Chap
- Start date
Alistair20000
Very well known Exeweb poster
The BBC cancelled Clarkson and others and this thread is about the BBC
MJP_Exeter
Well-known Exeweb poster
Umm they didn't cancel him. He was removed for assaulting a producer and left for disciplinary reasons. I love Clarkson but he wasn't cancelled on his political beliefs and values. He was rightly fired
Last edited:
Clarkson was sacked for assaulting a colleague, I'm not sure any company in the World would allow that. How is that being cancelled, honestly the Language of Right-wingers is bizarre nowadays, cancel-culture, anti-wpke, virtual-signalling, culture-wars, it's all darned meaningless boring buzzwords.
DB9
Very well known Exeweb poster
Anti-wpke?? Very meaningless.
Pete Martin (CTID)
Very well known Exeweb poster
Even with an 'o' in it!Anti-wpke?? Very meaningless.
Rosencrantz
Well-known Exeweb poster
Governments have always bumped up against the BBC throughout my lifetime and before. Thatcher, Major, Blair (and Campbell!), Brown, Cameron...they all had run ins with BBC news and current affairs. Some quite vehemently in Thatcher and Campbell. This is because impartiality in news and current affairs means asking hard questions to those in power and holding them to fact based account regardless of leanings. Calling them out where they are not being truthful with the public. This is the basis of journalism. This is what any news organisation should aim for.
This is what BBC news did, hence the run ins with all political party's and governments. However, the above governments for all their run ins, arguments and accusations pretty much left the BBC in situ without real threats to their future. Largely because they understood and respected the BBC's other "I" word that seems to have been forgotten recently, independence.
There has though, always been those in politics who believe they should not be held to account or questioned by the BBC as they are publicly funded. They tend to be on the hard left and hard right. They also have always accused the BBC of bias when they are asked tough questions and held to account.
Since Corbyn was elected leader in 2015 and since the ERG tail started wagging the Conservative Party dog around Brexit time and then became the dominant force of the Conservative Parliamentary Party, the issue of impartiality and the very definition of it within BBC news has been under more sustained attack by those who do not respect or give credence to the independence of the BBC. Rather they want the BBC to be diminished and brought under heel. Neither Labour under Corbyn or the Conservatives from after Cameron resigned, have really wanted to be held to account by any BBC news. They barely tolerated any news source questioning them, whether ITN, Sky News or others. This is why the public service broadcasters, BBC and C4, have been under attack and threat.
The Chairman, board and DG of the BBC should be there to protect the BBC's independence above all. They are not doing this. Instead it seems that the affect of not doing that as robustly as they should have led to a more timid approach where they are scared of doing anything that causes "outrage" from the political landscape. This is not how an independent news organisation can behave.
If the BBC and in particular the target of BBC News is undermined and subdued by a political party and it's independence made a mockery of as is happening, what next? It won't stop there. It will move on to the next targets of ITN and Sky News and we will end up with the partisan journalism that dominates the USA. The folly that it seems to be happening at Fox News of broadcasting things they know not be true and don't even believe in for sake of ratings is a very thin end of the wedge. That doesn't in my opinion seem like a British thing. It certainly doesn't seem like proper journalism.
It's easy to say that it won't happen here. We are different. We still need people to make that true though.
This is what BBC news did, hence the run ins with all political party's and governments. However, the above governments for all their run ins, arguments and accusations pretty much left the BBC in situ without real threats to their future. Largely because they understood and respected the BBC's other "I" word that seems to have been forgotten recently, independence.
There has though, always been those in politics who believe they should not be held to account or questioned by the BBC as they are publicly funded. They tend to be on the hard left and hard right. They also have always accused the BBC of bias when they are asked tough questions and held to account.
Since Corbyn was elected leader in 2015 and since the ERG tail started wagging the Conservative Party dog around Brexit time and then became the dominant force of the Conservative Parliamentary Party, the issue of impartiality and the very definition of it within BBC news has been under more sustained attack by those who do not respect or give credence to the independence of the BBC. Rather they want the BBC to be diminished and brought under heel. Neither Labour under Corbyn or the Conservatives from after Cameron resigned, have really wanted to be held to account by any BBC news. They barely tolerated any news source questioning them, whether ITN, Sky News or others. This is why the public service broadcasters, BBC and C4, have been under attack and threat.
The Chairman, board and DG of the BBC should be there to protect the BBC's independence above all. They are not doing this. Instead it seems that the affect of not doing that as robustly as they should have led to a more timid approach where they are scared of doing anything that causes "outrage" from the political landscape. This is not how an independent news organisation can behave.
If the BBC and in particular the target of BBC News is undermined and subdued by a political party and it's independence made a mockery of as is happening, what next? It won't stop there. It will move on to the next targets of ITN and Sky News and we will end up with the partisan journalism that dominates the USA. The folly that it seems to be happening at Fox News of broadcasting things they know not be true and don't even believe in for sake of ratings is a very thin end of the wedge. That doesn't in my opinion seem like a British thing. It certainly doesn't seem like proper journalism.
It's easy to say that it won't happen here. We are different. We still need people to make that true though.
And just as many who were outraged at Clarkson et als cancellation who are delighting in Lineker's departure.
There's certainly nobody of a right leaning nature on these boards questioning the Beeb's decision. Care to be the first? Go on, make my day.
Best not make comparisons with what has gone on in other countries – the snowflakes on the right will want you cancelled forthwith!
fred binneys head
Very well known Exeweb poster
You think the circumstances are the same?